Honolulu Star-Advertiser
Editorial / Island Voices
June 26, 2022
By Nancie Caraway

CINDY ELLEN RUSSELL / 2021
Kaimana Beach is a popular spot for visitors and residents

“We see brown everywhere, not much green, smelly garbage cans, bare patches in grass, cracked and broken steps, dry water fountains, slimy cement, pools of fetid standing water, rusted pipes, an unsanitary and unhygienic wasteland.”

No, those words aren’t the logline for a post-apocalyptic movie. They come from my Kaimana Beach notebook dating back more than a decade. One entry stands out. In a conversation with then-Honolulu Mayor Peter Carlisle (2010-2013), I shared my observations about the beach. His reply, “If you want to clean up this mess, you pay for it.” A disheartening exchange, I’m sure, for both of us.

But it does demonstrate the emotion and frustration that pit public policies and priorities against our reverence for place. For the human yearning for a regenerative connection with the natural world. Hawaiian indigenous wisdom is grounded in a primal and spiritual connection to specific places. Kaimana Beach is one such place. Its history, its genealogy, its awe-inspiring proximity to Diamond Head (Mount Leahi).

‘Aina is not just ocean or land — but a heart issue for Hawaiians. Environmental scientists value the holism and sustainability of these principles today more than ever.

The conditions at this beloved beach demoralize local people, taxpayers, who have watched it degenerate. Don’t our families deserve the clean and beautiful beaches our unsustainable tourists enjoy? It truly does hurt our hearts.

Kaimana Beach marks milestones in my life. A place for making memories. As a University of Hawaii-Manoa graduate student, I hauled my books there and slogged through Hegel and Plato. I enjoyed bento and talk-story with friends who reveled in being together sharing glorious sunsets and swims. I grieved when ashes were spread in waves taking the spirits of loved ones back to nature.

Why have efforts to preserve the special ambiance of the last local beach in Honolulu stalled through the years? A survey of the numerous task forces, environmental impact statements, resolutions, scientific and architectural plans, surpasses the limits of this commentary.

Consider the overlapping interests — the Waikiki Natatorium War Memorial organizations, city agencies, Diamond Head Neighborhood Board, state Historic Preservation Division, park users, commercial businesses — which have complicated compromise. And thwarted the efforts of four previous mayors and City Councils.

Flash forward to June 2022. Mayor Rick Blangiardi and the City Council now inherit this negligence. Council Chairman Tommy Waters (whose district includes Kaimana Beach) reports that the city Department of Facility Maintenance has been awarded $1 million in fiscal year 2022 specifically to “plan, design and construct shower improvements for Kaimana Beach Park.” This is a welcome and long-overdue solution to the rusted pipe that now serves as a “shower.”

Any crumb from the city to enhance Kaimana is good news. Critics might add that it’s too little too late. What about the disgraceful rotting of the Natatorium with its elegant arch, long-shuttered and hidden by fences and parked cars? Might it be honored at another more fitting locale? Then there are the picnic areas with dirt patches on spare grass and little shade. And surely the Health Department would disapprove of the fetid standing water and broken drinking fountain near the Diamond Head entrance to the beach.

Blangiardi recently signed the budget. We ask him for the broadest interpretation of “plan, design and construct shower improvements” to include landscape and regenerate the entire area adjacent to the beach.

Do we still feel joy when we visit the beach? Of course. And a grateful public says “mahalo nui loa” to the officials and advocates for their efforts over the years. But now is the time for decisive leadership to restore the last remaining beach on Oahu’s south shore. This is a sacred trust broken too many times.

Our commitment remains to the mission of the Kaimana Beach Coalition, a nonprofit founded by ocean-lover Rick Bernstein in 1990: “To protect this precious beach from commercialization, environmental degradation and to assure public access to this nurturing gathering place.”

Nancie Caraway, Ph.D., is a political scientist and advocate, and a former first lady of Hawaii.

Honolulu Star-Advertiser
Editorial / Island Voices
December 22, 2019
By Rick Bernstein, Tim Guard and Doorae Shin

DENNIS ODA / NOV. 8, 2018

This Waikiki War Memorial Natatorium is in a state of disrepair and ruin as a result of age and neglect.

Imagine a peaceful, respectful and cost-effective solution to the Waikiki War Memorial Natatorium conundrum. We propose the following idea for consideration.

Fort DeRussy is a United States military reservation in the west end of Waikiki, under jurisdiction of the U.S. Army. Unfenced and largely open to the public, it consists mainly of landscaped green space. The former Battery Randolph is now home to the U.S. Army Museum of Hawaii, which is open to the public; the Hale Koa Hotel, which serves as the Armed Forces Recreation Center and is exclusive to a military clientele; and the Daniel K. Inouye Asia/Pacific Center for Security Studies.

The Hale Koa Hotel recently completed a grand swimming complex for its military guests. The pool is located on the Diamond Head side of the hotel complex and there is a wide open area between the pool and the museum. The area is graced with grassy lawns and shade trees, and offers views of the ocean, which lies less than 100 yards away.

Each day best male enhancement pills grows generic levitra online devensec.com massively. You will notice a difference within weeks see for info now cialis generika of starting Sinrex. Hence, limiting energy regeneration process which consequently leads to a negative effect on the ability for devensec.com purchase cialis attaining and sustain a sturdy penile erection. My driver’s license, viagra discount sales in 1969, was my ticket to freedom and adventure. This sublime location would be a perfect resting place for the Waikiki War Memorial Stone and Plaque naming the 106 Hawaii soldiers who died in World War I. If desired, a reconstructed Memorial Arch could also be placed in this location. The city’s estimated cost for a new arch is $2 million.

This economical plan would respect the intent of the memorial builders by removing it from a place of conflict, Kaimana Beach and Kapiolani Park, and re-placing it in an appropriate military location in Waikiki with a new and functional swimming pool nearby. Further, it is next to the ocean and volleyball courts. Amazingly, this is the same tract of land that legendary Duke Kahanamoku, swimming star of the Natatorium, was born and raised on. Fort DeRussy is the spiritually pono resting place for this war memorial monument in so many ways.

If this sensible solution were embraced by our neighbors at Fort DeRussy, the city and the state, we could finally remove the long-suffering, dangerous and dilapidated natatorium structure and swimming pool from the beautiful Diamond Head/Waikiki oceanfront. This would open the view plane and create a stable sand beach with proper groinage that would protect it and Kaimana Beach from future erosion. This plan also removes any threat of a public-private partnership (PPP), which could saddle the entire beach and Fort De Russy park area with commercialization for the forseeable future.

Any PPP represents a major loss of access at the popular and much-used Kaimana Beach due to loss of parking and influx of increased tourism. Further, the beach plan in the city’s environmental impact statement proposes placing a parking lot directly in front of Kaimana Beach, right next to the Kaimana Beach Hotel. This is a terrible idea and an unpopular solution due to the loss of 33 parking spaces in the natatorium “pit” parking area. A less-impactful and reasonable solution lies on the mauka side of the grassy, tree-lined island dividing Kalakaua Avenue. Between the driveway into Kaimana Beach and the Waikiki Aquarium, is grassy open space that could easily be converted into 53 diagonal parking spaces to mirror current stalls on the mauka side of Kalakaua.

Former Mayor Mufi Hannemann’s 2010 Waikiki Natatorium Task Force voted to remove the natatorium and create a beach. We, as former members, today support the mayor, governor and Army in working together to make this respectful, safe and cost-effective solution a reality.

Edgar Hamasu, 89, another former task force member and former state Land Department deputy director, recently said of the natatorium: “It was a fun place when I was a kid in the ‘30s, but it fell into disrepair for good reason and should have been demolished years ago. I think Fort DeRussy would be a good and honorable solution.”

Rick Bernstein and Tim Guard were members of the 2010 Waikiki Natatorium Task Force; Doorae Shin is coordinator of the Surfrider Foundation-Oahu Chapter.

Honolulu Star-Advertiser, November 10, 2019
By Gordon Y.K. Pang

Ocean-water pool is part of Waikiki Natatorium restoration EIS

DENNIS ODA / NOV. 2018 – The option of tearing down the bulk of the Waikiki War Memorial Natatorium structure and creating a “war memorial beach” is projected at $35.2 million, including construction of a new parking area and replacement of the Ocean Safety and Lifeguard Services Division office. The preferred option of rehabilitating the open circulation salt-water pool, at far left, would cost about $31.8 million, including contingency, construction management and engineering, according to the three-volume EIS.

The long debate over the future of the Waikiki War Memorial Natatorium may finally be over.

The deteriorating facility — opened in 1927 as a monument to Hawaii residents who served during World War I, but closed in 1979 due to disrepair — would be rehabilitated by the city as an operational, open circulation saltwater pool, according to the city’s preferred “perimeter deck” option outlined in the final Environmental Impact Statement released to the public Friday.

If the project goes forward, the Honolulu City Council would need to approve a special use permit and any city funding for it.

The construction price tag is projected at $31.8 million, including contingency, construction management and engineering, according to the three-volume EIS. Cost of operations and maintenance is projected at $967,000 annually for “periodic maintenance, minor repairs, a groundskeeper, lifeguards, utilities and miscellaneous supplies,” the study said. A staff of 15 is projected, including lifeguards.

Funding source remains a question mark. A public-private partnership and/or nonprofit fundraising “to either help develop or sustain the operations of the Natatorium are recognized as a reasonable assumption,” the report said.

The capital cost for the preferred option is anticipated to be less than that of two other, long-discussed options.

Tearing down the bulk of the structure and creating a “war memorial beach” is projected at $35.2 million, including construction of a new parking area and replacement of the Ocean Safety and Lifeguard Services Division office, now located in the Natatorium structure. Annual operations and maintenance under that scenario would cost $356,000.

On the other end of the spectrum, restoring the Natatorium’s original closed-pool system is projected at $42.7 million with annual operations and maintenance estimated at $1.13 million.

Caldwell said Saturday that he continues to prefer the beach option because of the need for beach space and “because I think salt-water swimming pools are a thing of the past.” But costs and other factors led to the administration’s decision to make the perimeter deck option the preferred alternative in the final EIS.

He gave no timetable for completing the project, but said he expects his administration will include money for planning and design in the fiscal 2021 budget.

“It’s going to be a long timeline because it’s a very complex process we have to follow, in part because it’s on the Historic Register. The process has to be done very carefully and thoughtfully and I think it’s going to take some time, but I think the process has to begin because, for 50 years, the Natatorium has been decaying because of people’s inability to make decisions — politicians and others,” he said. “It shows great disrespect for those whose names are on the memorial … and its shows disrespect for the people who use this park and celebrate the great outdoors out there.”

The best way to combat a curse is not properly treated, cialis prices it grows to infect all parts of the mind, body, and soul. Testosterone therapy is another widely prescribed treatment for erectile viagra uk sale dysfunction. The effective pill of Kamagra works well by damaging the cialis discount generic cancer cells. Also you will see that the pill is extremely cheap so one can afford it completely. click for more info viagra online india pills are supposed to be eaten up an hour or probably 45 minutes before they start having sex.

The conclusion in the final EIS is not surprising. A draft EIS release in November 2018 stated a preference for the perimeter deck plan at what was then projected to cost $25.6 million.

But it’s a big reversal from Caldwell’s position on the issue in 2013, when he stood with then-Gov. Neil Abercrombie to announce a partnership to develop a public memorial beach. The city intended to tear down the pool, relocate the archway and create a new beach where the crumbling pool and stadium now stand at a cost of $18.4 million in 2015 dollars. Full restoration was then projected to cost $69.4 million.

The 2013 plan was supported by the Kaimana Beach Coalition and criticized by Friends of the Natatorium.

In 2015, the city announced it was holding up the EIS process to consider an option between a full tear-down and complete restoration at the request of the State Historic Preservation Division.

In 2016, the National Trust for Historic Preservation released a plan it commissioned that would replace the swim basin’s seawalls with individual chevrons that would allow seawater to circulate in and out of the pool. A representative for the National Trust said the organization would work with local stakeholders on a fundraising campaign if its plan was accepted.

On Saturday, Maurice “Mo” Radke, president of Friends of the Natatorium, said he was happy that the final EIS was out at the start of Veterans Day weekend, and that he expects lots of discussion about it at Monday’s American Legion sponsored commemoration at 11 a.m.

The Friends group has tried for decades to get the Natatorium restored and Radke noted that funding had even been put aside by the city at one point under former Mayor Jeremy Harris.

Radke said he expects both the Friends and National Trust would help with efforts to raise funds for the project, a job that would be made easier if the city gives stronger indications it is committed to restoration. “We couldn’t cultivate anyone because the (previous) proposed option was demolition,” he said. “Who’s going to participate in the demolition of a war memorial?”

He emphasized, however, “there has to be a mechanism in place to be able to receive funds and figure out a way for the city to use those funds.”

The 2019 plan calls for the pool deck to be reconstructed on support piles that would surround the pool at approximately 4 feet above the water’s surface at low tide and 3 feet at high tide. Because there would be a free flow of water between the ocean and the pool, it doesn’t need to meet state Department of Health swimming pool requirements.

Jim Bickerton, an attorney for the Kaimana Beach Coalition, said there are significant dangers tied to the use of a pile-and-grate system. “They forget that current is intended to flow through the grates,” he said.

“The point is a grate lets the current keep going, a wall bounces the current back. So people end up getting pinned against these bars under water — and (the city’s) response is signage,” Bickerton said. “As a tort lawyer, I can tell you that this is going to be a major liability for the city but just as a citizen, it’s a safety issue. These are people going into the pool because it seems safer than the ocean but it’s more dangerous.”

Bickerton said the final EIS is the first acknowledgment by the city that a public- private partnership is likely going to be needed. “Our biggest concern and fear is that one last little sliver of daylight for the public is going to be closed off again by commercial interests because the city cannot tell us that this will be free, open space 24/7 like a beach park is. They’re going to have to close it off for commercial purposes and as time goes by, it will be used more and more and there will be less and less access and parking for people who just need to get into the ocean.”

Caldwell said he believes the project can become reality either with or without a private partner.

“I think it’s way too early to talk about what a public- private partnership would look like,” he said. “It’s going to take some real vetting, sitting down and talking with stakeholders on all levels — the Council, the executive branch, the neighbors in that community, the historic preservation guys and the people who use the beach.”

Councilman Tommy Waters, whose district includes Waikiki and the Natatorium, said he wants to hear from constituents before weighing in with his opinion. “I have a few questions … especially as it relates to swimmer safety,” he said.

Waters said he’s hoping to hold a hearing on the issue either in the community or at Honolulu Hale. “I’m looking forward to a lively discussion with my community weighing the three options,” he said.

Hawaii Public Radio: The Conversation
December 21, 2018
By Catherine Cruz

The fishing vessel Pacific Paradise ran aground off the coast of Waikiki in 2017. It was stuck in place for 58 days. CREDIT NOAA

Transcribed with quotes emphasized by the Kaimana Beach Coalition.

Catherine Cruz: Just days before deadline for public input, we’re learning more about the preferred alternative to the future of the Waikiki War Memorial Natatorium. State Health Director Bruce Anderson, who grew up swimming in the pool, talks to us about his concerns about the proposed deck. Shoring the structure up may mean driving scores of pilings 65 feet into the reef, and he has concerns about silt in the pool affecting the marine conservation district next door.

Finding a certified local Chiropractor Virginia Beach is so easy to do cialis online with the help of the Internet. This diversion in the body phenomenon discount generic viagra affects the sugar level up to large extent as insulin becomes unable to absorb laser light, or unable to adequately respond to absorbed light, no stimulation of hair regrowth will occur.” What should be noted is LLLT therapists report that use of this therapy in conjunction with minoxidil (Rogaine and other brands) or finasteride (Propecia) typically yields more effective results. The condition comprises an unhealthy lifestyle and genetic history. tadalafil 10mg You cialis no prescription can also safeguard your privacy through online purchase.
Bruce Anderson: In the past we’ve had concerns about water quality and safety at the pool. It was proposed as [an] enclosed swimming pool much the way it was when it was first constructed and even then problems with water quality, turbidity, was always high from sediments being stirred up in the pool. I remember swimming there as a kid, and we never saw the bottom. In fact it was just a murky, murky pool, and the slide and the platforms were what attracted most of the kids and others to the area. It truly was a nice venue for getting together and enjoying those activities, but it never was a great swimming venue. Even the swimmers I know who swam in the Olympics said it was hard to swim there and they could never see the bottom. Of course it wouldn’t be sanctioned as a competitive pool these days, given that all those pools are freshwater. Saltwater has a different buoyancy and wouldn’t be appropriate.

In any event, getting back to the most current proposal, it does [address] some of the issues as it relates to water quality. We wouldn’t worry as much about staph infections, it does allow for some open circulation, actually it’s an elevated pool deck, which allows for water to pass underneath the deck and refresh water in the pool. Part of the biggest problem in the past probably would remain and that is the accumulation of sediment. The pool acts as a sediment catchment basin – the turbid water gets into that area, it’s calm and all the solids settle out and you get a layer a sediment over the years. In fact, even over the first year or so the pool was in operation originally it started accumulating and continue[d] throughout the time the pool was there. I see this as an ongoing issue – it will be very hard to clean out the sediment and it naturally will occur, there’s nothing anyone can do about that. It gets stirred up by the surf and comes in and then settles, and that’s the way everything works, except that it can’t go anywhere because it’s settling into a basin that would collect the sediment over time, it would be suspended any time it was agitated, which is what happened in the past.

So that’s the biggest issue. It does not meet our pool rule definition. That was a key issue, we do have specific rules for saltwater swimming pools which would require among other things that you should be able to see a disc at the bottom of the pool, that would be very difficult with the original proposal. And it’s hard to know whether that would have been a problem here. The reason for that is you need to recover someone if they sink before they drown. In fact there were some, at least one death at the old natatorium because they couldn’t find the individual until it was too late. So being able to see the bottom is a key safety issue, but as far was water quality goes it should meet the coastal water quality standards, no reason to think it wouldn’t. That would be just as safe to swim there as it would at Kaimana but the turbidity issue is still gonna be a problem as I see it, I think they’re gonna need to think through that.

And I would also question its utility. It’s a variant of the old pool that [makes] it difficult to swim. I’m not sure exactly how it’s going to be constructed, but they talked about bars around the perimeter of the pool, which would be presumably to keep sharks and other things that you don’t want in the pool out of the pool, and they would allow for water to be circulating. But that seems to be a safety issue in my mind, but that’s for others to best determine.

There are some issues that need to be looked at, but the key issue for many was whether or not it would meet our swimming pool rule definition, and it does not, and therefore would not be subject to the very stringent standards we have for public swimming pools. It’s a very large pool, and even when we had hundreds of kids swimming there, school children and others swam there regularly – it would be hard to keep track of where everyone was at any one time. And the problem with a pool where you can’t see the bottom, is if someone gets in trouble and sinks, you’re not going to see them and be able to recover them in time. So lifeguards would certainly help to minimize the risk, but it would still be there, and again I would question the utility of the pool. I remember I actually learned to swim at Kaimana Beach, and the reason for that was it was too dangerous too learn how to swim in the pool. And finally after we learned how to swim in the ocean we would have our time in the pool. And we [were] watched very carefully and by then we were able to swim confidently and as far as I know no one got in trouble during those last days of your swimming lessons, but it was not a nice venue for swimming as it was – I had one other item that I think might need to be considered, and that is talking to Bruce Carlson (Director of the Waikiki Aquarium from 1985 to 2002 – KBC) and some of the others who ran the aquarium, that’s where they go to catch box jellyfish, they could almost always find them there. They apparently settled to the bottom and they come up during the full moon, and as we all know, I think it’s 6, 7, 8 days, I can’t remember exactly when after the full moon, they’re up on the surface where they may get into contact with people swimming. But box jellyfish might be an issue, I don’t remember them being a problem when the pool was used regularly, but things have changed since then. (there is increasing evidence linking box jellyfish abundance to climate change – KBC)

All sorts of things I think need to be investigated more thoroughly and obviously we need to look at alternatives as well, but this pool is not going to violate any of the pool rules that we have because it simply doesn’t meet the definition of a public swimming pool. When you look at the existing pool now, although it hasn’t been maintained in decades, it’s full of sand and sediment, and I can’t see that not continuing to be an issue, it’s going to be a huge maintenance problem even if it’s a soft bottom with beach sand, you’re going to have sediment on top of the sand, and there’s no way to avoid that. That’s going to happen naturally. And I don’t know how you could possibly remove that material. I can’t think of any mechanical way you could do it that would be effective.

CC: So it’s just gonna spread out in that area?

BA: Yeah, and again the risk from a safety standpoint is that silt gets resuspended, that’s what happened when people were swimming there in the past, you get hundreds of kids in there and others and they agitate the sediment and it would get suspended in the water column and it was a murky green pool, like pea soup some days. But that’s probably what will happen again, maybe not to the same extent, but it certainly is an issue that planners need to think about.

CC: Apparently the proposal calls for putting pilings in along the reef?

BA: Well they have to suspend the pool deck somehow and I presume they’d be pounding down pilings and then suspending the deck on top of those.

CC: Anything from the Health Department perspective on that at all?

BA: Oh, they’d have to implement best management practices during any construction there, probably put in silk curtains to minimize the amount of sediment and construction debris that would be suspended in the area. The pool area, area around the pool is a marine protected area. It has the highest levels of protection. We were very concerned when that fishing vessel went aground last year and it sat there for many months and did have adverse impacts on corals and other things that are in the area. The area’s under stress as it is and any construction activity there would have to implement very stringent measures to prevent any damage to corals and other marine life that are – that’s in the vicinity.

The point is that area around the natatorium is a very important area from a marine protection standpoint, and any construction activity there would be scrutinized to be sure that it wasn’t adversely impacting [the] nearby environment.

CC: Anderson was also the acting administrator for the Department of Land and Natural Resources’ Aquatics Division. He made reference to the fishing vessel Pacific Paradise that ran aground at Kaimana Beach last year. This month the Department of Land and Natural Resources recommended fining the boat owner more than 300,000 dollars because of the damage to the reef…

Hawaii Public Radio: The Conversation
December 20, 2018
By Catherine Cruz & Bill Dorman

CREDIT DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES

Transcribed with quotes emphasized by the Kaimana Beach Coalition.

Catherine Cruz: This is The Conversation on Hawaii Public Radio. I’m Catherine Cruz. You’re in for a treat today as we listen back to some of Hawaii’s history. Specifically we’re looking at Waikiki, its past, present, and future. Our guests include Dolan Eversole, a coastal geologist with the University of Hawaii’s Sea Grant college. He’s here to talk about managing our coastal resources as we face rising warming waters. And Andrew Rossiter, he’s been the Director of the Waikiki Aquarium since 2004 following long stints in Japan, Canada, and Africa. Welcome to you both.

Excerpt beginning at 21:50

The man might respond with embarrassment or anger or he may viagra generika hop over to these guys state that he was over-aroused or stressed. This is the medicine that is made of Sildenafil viagra generika 50mg citrate. The Genetic Literacy Project also states the studies have linked genetically modified animal visit this buying levitra without prescription feed to severe stomach inflammation and uteri in pigs, as well as genetically modified corn to rat tumors. Belly fat is the cost of viagra toughest one to reduce and it is the one that related with several health issues.
CC: And Andrew, you were talking about the master plan for your facility, but right next to it is the Waikiki War Memorial Natatorium, and there we’re in the middle of discussing what it’s future is going to be like and we’ve got this draft EIS that’s out and I understand that part of the preferred alternative calls for shoring up the walls which includes I believe putting in pilings. So how are you looking at that?

Andrew Rossiter: I actually only heard about this yesterday. I’d be very, very cautious about doing pilings next to the aquarium because the vibrations that come from pilings will be transmitted through the ground and into the exhibits at the aquarium and fish are very, very sensitive to vibration, much much more so than humans.

CC: And as far as the tanks, I mean are they, were they built to withstand –

AR: The tanks [would] probably be structurally sound, but it’s the fish and the animals living inside them that I’d be most concerned about.

CC: OK. And you plan to weigh in on that?

AR: Yeah, now that I know about it, I will, yep.

CC: And I think that’s a concern, I think people just need to know what’s planned for that area, whether you’re talking about sea level rise, or warming temperatures in the ocean, what do we have planned and how do we deal with it?

Bill Dorman: And that idea, also Dolan that you were talking about earlier, about lessons learned from elsewhere, were not in isolation in terms of what is going on and that adaptability. What is to be learned in that area?

Dolan Eversole: Yeah, I guess I’m a glass half full kind of guy, similar to Andrew’s point about not looking at sea level rise as a challenge as much as an opportunity. It certainly has its challenges and we’ve done a lot of mapping on that. But there are [a] number of places around the world that have been dealing with sea level rise far longer than we have. Even places like Miami are well ahead of us in having to deal with what we call chronic erosion and nuisance flooding. So they’re having to deal with things like every high tide the streets flood, and it’s not the end of the world – they’re finding ways to deal with it. As far as a long term resilient community there are some challenges there of course. But they’re finding way to deal with it in the short term with pumping out systems and raising the elevation of streets.

There are some active discussions going on about how that would look in a place like Waikiki or Honolulu for that matter. Where we start this is probably in our most critical, high density areas like Waikiki and Kakaako where there’s tremendous amount of infrastructure already. As I said earlier, I’m more of an optimistic kind of guy. Looking at something like the rail coming in maybe is our opportunity to think more strategically about where subsurface utilities might go as that thing is built. Those are some of the opportunities that I see. One of the challenges that I see with respect to [the] ground water table coming right up right through the surface of the ground is we have our wastewater systems, storm drains, that are typically gravity fed, so they’re on a very low slope towards a forced main that pumps it toward a wastewater treatment facility. Well as sea level rises, those gravity-fed systems aren’t gonna work any more. So that’s probably one of the low-hanging fruit[s], is starting to think more carefully about our wastewater systems in high-density areas to start.

Those communities that are a little higher elevation as you get in that 6 to 8 to 10 feet above sea level, you’re probably OK for at least 100 years or so. But those that are really low elevation along the coast, think Kakaako, Waikiki, pretty much all of our urban corridor in Honolulu, they’re gonna be faced with starting to wrestle with these. I wish I had more specific examples that I could give you, that here’s a place that we’re looking carefully at. There is a lot of research going on right now, trying to look at what other communities are doing, and there’s a lot of attention being paid to that. So we’re certainly not ignoring it and trying to learn from others as things develop.

Excerpt beginning at 27:38

CC: We are talking about Waikiki with Andrew Rossiter and Dolan Eversole and Bill Dorman, [HPR’s] News Director. And we were discussing the Waikiki Natatorium, since that project is in the throes of, what do we do, do we rebuild it, do we tear down the arch and rebuild it somewhere else and build a new beach. That’s [an] important point to talk about because it’s right next to your area, Andrew, and there’s concern apparently about silt and the turbidity, and the effect of some of that kicking up and affecting not only the beach on the other side but also your area.

AR: Yeah. The Natatorium has been essentially building up sediment over the past 50 so years. Some of the reports that I’ve read say it’s between 5 and 8 feet deep. The bottom layers of that [have] got no oxygen, it’s anoxic, it’s black, it’s probably got lots of toxins in it. And our concern is that if one of the walls were to collapse, or if they did the renovation improperly, the sea would be allowed to access the natatorium directly, and it would wash all of that sediment in a big plume in one direction, because the current there doesn’t actually come from off shore to one shore, it actually comes along the shore. And it goes from the natatorium towards Waikiki. So essentially if the walls were to collapse or there was an issue the sediment would all be washed in a big plume from the natatorium right down to Waikiki, and on its way it would go over the marine protected area and probably kill everything there.

CC: I mean that would be catastrophic.

AR: Oh, it would be absolutely catastrophic, yeah. And not only to the wildlife, but also to the tourist industry in Waikiki.

CC: And Dolan, what about issues relating to the sea level rise if you’re got a project there on the beach?

DE: Yeah, that’s a good question. A multimillion dollar question at that. I did look at the EIS for the natatorium and I’m pleased to say that they do at least acknowledge sea level rise in the environmental assessment. They don’t say specifically what they’re gonna do to accommodate sea level but they do reference the DLNR study that I mentioned earlier with respect to what’s been already documented for predictions for sea level rise, and they say that they will take provisions to accommodate up to 3.2 feet of sea level, which is what the state is recommending now for, at least conceptually, for new projects is to consider up to 3.2 feet of sea level. What that looks like in the final design is yet to be determined, but they’re at least acknowledging sea level in the report. It may be a simple matter of just raising the elevation of the perimeter walls that are proposed 2-3 feet to accommodate that, but it also gets to this question of, well how long is [the] new restored natatorium intended to be there? If it’s a legacy piece of infrastructure that 100 years or more, that’s going to be a real challenge to keep it in place, at least how it looks now. If it’s a 40 to 50 year type – most coastal infrastructure is designed to last about 50 years, seawalls and groins and things like that – 50 years in a general engineering lifetime. So 50 years we might be looking at about 3 to 4 feet of sea level rise, which is probably something that we could accommodate. Beyond that, it’s really hard to say what that area might look like.

CC: So engineering’s gonna be key.

AR: Yeah, I got firsthand experience of concrete and rebar structures built right next to the ocean. The aquarium is now 61-62 years old, so past the 50 year cutoff point, and it’s really shown its age.

DE: Yeah, and that’s common throughout Waikiki. We see a lot of the seawalls and structures that were built 50 to 80 years ago are really starting to deteriorate now at a more accelerated pace. Partly because they’re hitting that age, and partly because the water – the ocean levels have been unusually high the last several years. You mentioned the splash earlier, we’re seeing that throughout Waikiki, that things – the water level is unusually high, and we’ve all heard this term “king tides” now. That is a phenomena that is not a new phenomena, we just coined a new term for it – but it [has] been unusually on what I would call a temporary basis. So it’s – last, two summers ago it was almost a foot higher than it should have been, the water levels in Honolulu. That is going back down to near normal, but sea level is going to catch back up. And it’s going to look like that all the time in about 20-30 years.

Excerpt beginning at 43:22

CC: Andrew, doesn’t the city have some kind of plan to also deal with an eroding – I don’t know if it was some kind of landscaping area abutting your aquarium?

AR: I don’t know what they’ve got planned over there, I just could ask Dolan. Are there any plans for artificial reefs to help buffer the effect of wave action?

DE: There aren’t any plans yet but there’s been some discussion about tying the beach restoration efforts to conservation efforts for the reef as well.

AR: I would jump in with that and say it would be a great opportunity to also reintroduce corals to some areas and see if they propagate there, and then if that succeeded the fish would colonize naturally and you’d get back up to something approaching what it used to be.

DE: Yeah, I’m glad you brought that up, this came up in a meeting recently with DLNR. These are challenging projects to try to kick off, but if we’re talking about a major engineering project, building new structures and things like that, typically what’s required from the Army Corps of Engineers is some form of what they call compensatory mitigation, so if you put rocks on even an algal reef, so a lot of the near shore reef in Waikiki is not a really pristine reef, is more of coralline algae, but it is a live reef, and if you have no other option than put rocks on it, you need to compensate through some form, and we’re thinking maybe a form of mitigation might be to do a reef restoration project nearby to mitigate the potential impact [to the] reef.

CC: We do have a call on the line, Rick [Bernstein] from Honolulu, do you have a question?

Rick Bernstein: Hi, yes. I have been studying the Environmental Impact Statement, and as you know there are two plans in play. One is the new beach plan, the other is the perimeter deck plan. Regarding that silt that Dr. Rossiter talked about earlier, that silt according to [the] environment impact statement study by sea engineering this year says that the silt will not only go in the other direction, it will also go into Kaimana Beach depending on which way the littoral drift is going that particular day. And upon occasion the beach will be closed, says this report. The environmental impact statement for the beach plan mitigates the silt by grading it, placing an environmental cover over it, covering that with gravel and then covering that with two feet of sand. The new perimeter deck plan has no budget nor any plan whatsoever for mitigating this silt, which will flow freely through grated walls into the ocean, so I think that’s really important and I’d like to hear Dr. Rossiter and Dolan’s ideas about that. Thank you.

CC: Who wants to take that?

DE: I guess I’ll take a stab at that. Thank you for the call, Rick. I think – the mitigation of the silt material that we’ve described as being several feet thick in the natatorium basin now is problematic. I think that is something that needs to be addressed. Allowing it to just freely flush out into the open ocean in the nearshore environment is not really – I don’t see how that’s not gonna have a big negative impact. It’s not the end of the world, there are ways to mitigate it as Rick mentioned for the beach design. There’s another analogy here with the Hilton Lagoon, the Duke Kahanamoku Lagoon. When they restored that, they simply put a geo – they didn’t remove it, they put a geotextile layer down and then they put sand on top of that. So there are ways you can mitigate it without it costing, you know, tens of millions of dollars. But I think there needs to be some more thought put into how we mitigate this fine silt, ’cause it is going to be a problem. If you have too much fine silt it can obviously smother the reef and cause all kinds of impacts to the near shore.

CC: So much for your reef restoration if there’s gonna be a major silt problem. Andrew?

AR: I just agree with everything Dolan has just said. Silt is and always will be a big problem unless it’s removed. Even if it’s underneath the natatorium there will be seepage of nitrates, nitrites, into the natatorium water itself, which will probably precipitate large algae blooms and you’ll have a natatorium that is essentially bright green and cloudy in color.

(Long silent pause)

CC: Interesting to think about projects that are on the drawing board right now and what we need to do and how to mitigate all these issues relating to protecting Waikiki.

BD: And the impacts really of not only the foreseen, but the unforeseen, dealing with issues of weather and change and storms, they may have impacts that we are not anticipating and – Andrew is seen nodding your head.

AR: Yeah, exactly. I think in projects like this it’s very important to get as many different perspectives as possible, because if you’re just a pure engineer, you’re looking at the physical structure. If you’re a biologist, you’re looking at something else. If you’re a geologist you’re looking at the substructure. But to get all these different perspectives together then you’ll get an overarching view of what to do right, what could go wrong, and how to resolve the issues.

BD: And is there a forum that you gentlemen are involved in that touches on that, or that is again looking to that glass half full to the way forward, is there something that –

DE: With respect to the natatorium, I’m not aware of any particular working group or anything like that, at least I’m not part of it. There probably is something internal to the city where they’ve had a team of people looking at it beyond just production of the EIS. But in Waikiki as part of this Waikiki beach district actually ends at the Kapahulu groin. But if you think of Kapahulu groin to the Ala Wai we have formed a working committee, that’s the Waikiki Beach Community Advisory Committee, and it’s largely composed of beach boys, lifeguards, operators on the beach, government officials, and we’ve been asking very specific questions about what should we be doing in Waikiki and what is your version of Waikiki. Of course that committee’s responsibility doesn’t extend as far down as the natatorium but it might serve as a good model [that] we could look at.

Hawaii Public Radio: The Conversation
December 13, 2018
By Catherine Cruz & Ryan Finnerty

CREDIT WAIKIKI NATATORIM / FLICKR / CC BY 2.0

Transcribed by the Kaimana Beach Coalition.

Catherine Cruz: Christmas is coming up fast, but even faster is a deadline to submit your two cents about the future of the Waikiki Natatorium War Memorial. A long-awaited draft Environment Impact Statement has a deadline of Christmas Eve. The latest twist is that the preferred option is a modified deck design, not tearing down the structure, to make way for a memorial beach and building a new arch inland that has been the Mayor’s personal preference.

The draft EIS design puts the modified design as cheaper than just demolishing it, but is it? Opponents question the inclusion of costs to build an ocean safety building as part of the beach option. The city had proposed it once before, but then pulled back after push back from a park watchdog group and park users.

We invited Robert Kroning, the city’s Design and Construction Director, to stop by yesterday afternoon to talk about the EIS and the modified deck option.

Robert Kroning: It allows us to maintain pretty much the entire structure that’s there now, the Natatorium that we know today. The only real difference being the walls that hold up the deck. And that allows the ocean to flow through and so we have a circulation system that is still ocean and where we don’t have to do all the work to meet pool rules, which are quite stringent. Two sides of the swim area will be – are made of fiber-reinforced polymer. It’s like a very hard plastic-type material, and it will be bars, not necessarily mesh. Bars so that there’s free movement from vertical movement up and down.

CC: So more like a grate?

RK: Right. Or a fence sort of construction. And one of the important parts of having a basin that is good to swim in is to make sure that the water within there is not too stagnant so it’ll allow the flow with the currents and the wave action.

CC: The Kaimana Beach Coalition has raised some questions about liability, if whether that system is in use anywhere else, if it’s been tested anywhere, and if that would be any type of a liability or concern for swimmers that might get caught in some tricky conditions over there.

RK: I don’t think that this structure exists in this type of a swimming area the way we’re looking to design it. But there’s certainly testing that goes on, and it will be fully vetted and tested for safety and for all those concerns.

CC: Currently the Natatorium houses I think some offices for the ocean safety folks that guard that beach, so what does the EIS include as part of that plan?

RK: Our ocean safety folks have been giving us some guidance and information on what they would require and how they would operate if it were a beach. Or even if it were a perimeter deck, because they would be responsible for the perimeter deck option. And then the Department of Parks and Recreation if it becomes a pool would provide the lifeguards for that. And they’re analyzing and determining how they would operate it and so forth. So the numbers that are in the EIS right now are their initial analysis on the operations and the numbers of lifeguards that they would need throughout the day so we can get an annual cost for providing those lifeguards.

CC: But I would think you would need more lifeguards than if it’s a basin? Is that right?

RK: If it’s a structure, intuitively it seems like that, so you might say that it – I think whether it’s a beach versus a perimeter deck or a pool, there’s probably different operating hours that they would operate. And so some of the difference in numbers may be related to that. A pool more than likely would be closed a little more often than a beach would be throughout the year and may not be open as long as the beach would need lifeguards to be stationed. So those kind of things are still under analysis by the departments.

CC: From what I understand there’s a segment in the EIS that calls for a separate lifeguard building.

RK: For the lifeguards, if we maintain the structure that’s there now, whether it’s for a pool or for a perimeter deck, we will most likely keep the ocean safety folks in the structure that they’re in now, under the bleachers is basically where they have their offices. And we would upgrade them and renovate them as part of the project. If we turn it into a beach, well that structure goes away so we would need to create, find another space for that operation to work out of.

CC: The administration had plans for a standalone lifeguard building on the other side of the aquarium, so is that where this would be sited?

RK: It could be. Again, it’s open, we haven’t made a final decision on any of that. So those are the things that would have to be finalized in the construction for that.

CC: OK. The reason I bring that up is I think that the preservation society, the watchdog group of the park, had raised some questions about whether that was the best place, taking green space away from park users for a lifeguard building which – it’s an administration building [that] could be anywhere else.

RK: Right. So the answer hasn’t been determined yet. It may not go there, it may go somewhere else.

CC: And is the price of building that building included in the EIS?

RK: It is.

Usually, this condition is found in older men who bought here cheap viagra in usa are above the age of 18. Its key ingredient is generic no prescription viagra generic tadalafil that helps in the process of impotency curingWORKING :Apcalis comes under a group of medicines called phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors. Women get a better chance to enjoy pleasurable orgasms with enlarged phallus as more friction is produced on the wall of the vagina. cialis online without prescription Also, it is found that hormonal imbalance and over active pituitary glands is also responsible for lack of sexual discount levitra wish. CC: Is that –

RK: It’s about 1.8 is what we’re estimating that.

CC: And are those the same figures that were just lifted from the previous design, or was it – are they new figures?

RK: They’re adjusted. We have to take into consideration that the staff that is being, for lack of a better term, evicted from their offices in the Waikiki War Memorial will have to be housed somewhere. And so whether it’s actually in that spot or somewhere else I don’t think is that critical right now to the EIS but the estimate on what it would cost to put them somewhere does need to be included.

CC: OK. I just raise that because there was push back and concern about whether is was an administration building, if it should be sited in that park or somewhere else, and just build a lifeguard stand.

RK: Right. So that will all have to be analyzed. But in the end it still adds costs. The property that the Waikiki War Memorial sits on, basically the structure, is state land, so DLNR, but there’s been an Executive Order to the city to maintain and take care of it. And so that’s why the city is involved and pretty much [are] de facto owners of that property and doing what we need to do with it. The land behind it is City and County land and is a part of I think counted as part of Kapiolani Park.

CC: And the Trust.

RK: And the Trust.

CC: Commercialism has been something that has been raised by the Kapiolani Park Preservation Society and the Kaimana Beach Coalition. How do you address that?

RK: We have no plan to commercialize the area at all. So it’s not part of what we’re proposing as any of the alternatives or any of the actions going forward.

CC: OK. But I mean, does it allow for any commercialism?

RK: In the future, anybody interested in commercializing the area could attempt it and would have to go through all the different – probably, maybe even have to do an EIS again just to do that action and would get the scrutiny of pretty much the same players that are part of the stakeholders of this project. So I’m sure the Kapiolani Park Trust would get involved and all the stakeholders of the area as some kind of an attempt to commercialize the area would be proposed. I just know the Caldwell administration has no interest in commercializing it right now.

So Mayor Caldwell is the decision maker, I mean, he’s the one we’re doing this analysis for. And yes, initially based on him wanting to do something, so why this all got started again in the first place, because he understood very clearly that it was just unacceptable to leave the Natatorium in the condition that it’s in. And so at the time that we went forward and we were looking at OK, if we’re going to do something, what is the proposed action we should propose? And there had been a task force under the Hannemann administration that had kinda reviewed and looked at the situation and came up with the beach alternative as what was the most appropriate. In about 1999 we were inches away from completing a full restoration of the whole Natatorium. And what happened was there was a lawsuit that came about, and in the end the judge decreed that we need to stop until the Department of Health could develop pool rules, because at the time there were no rules for saltwater pools.

It took two years for them to do that, and when they did, the rules that they instituted then made it impossible for the project we were going forward with to be complete ’cause it didn’t meet the pool rules. So once that happened everything pretty much stopped again. And it took until Mayor Caldwell because mayor to say no, we need to do something. So based on all the information that had happened before, we decided well, it looks like there’s really only two options. We can either build it according to pool rules or demolish it and turn it into a beach. So the proposed action when we first started this again was, turn it into a beach, that’s what he thought was the best option and that’s what he wanted to do.

So move forward to today, in all that time that’s gone past we’ve done the Environmental Impact Statement process, which is a lot of analysis and review and consultation. And in that time what we’ve discovered is that we do have the ability to do another option, which is now this perimeter deck. And that took quite a few iterations. We had attempted that once, we had consultations with the State Historic Preservation Division, who had said “we want you to try to save a little more of the structure”. So at first we went through an iteration and they were basically, “save the bleachers and then get rid of everything else in front of it”. And so we had stakeholders come in and look at that and nobody liked that, it was horrible, forget it, none of that. So then we went a little bit farther and we developed what is now the perimeter deck. We were still quite uncertain that this would be acceptable to the Department of Health as not being classified as a pool.

And so it took us a while before we could get to meet with them where they said, they took a look at it and have agreed, yes, this does not have to meet pool rules. So once that happened, that allowed us to now include it as an alternative. With that as an alternative and a relook at all the analysis on – an EIS looks at many things. Historic, cultural, economic, costs, fiscal-type things, and local input for – and then actually how it affects the true physical environment, like marine biology and corals, and shoreline, and everything. So the whole gamut things that it looks at. And after we’ve done the analysis on all of those different categories what we’ve realized is the perimeter deck is probably the best of the three options. We’ve presented it to the mayor and talked to him about it and said, you know, we originally went with the beach, we think that’s not the best option anymore, we’d like you to change your proposed action to be the perimeter deck. And he has agreed to that.

CC: OK. And the big question he said is the money part of it.

RK: Certainly. None of these are perfect answers, right? There’s passion, it’s [a] passionate issue on two sides. You get your preservationists and you’ve got your Kaimana Beach turn it into a beach type opinions. The nice thing I like about my role is I just stay objective about the whole thing and try to look at the data. It’d be nice if we could throw the data in a machine and it would pop out an answer, but it doesn’t, so there’s still some subjectivity to it. But yes. So cost is one of the important aspects of this.

What I think a lot of the people are misunderstanding, the actual capital costs of the perimeter deck are the least of the three options. Clearly the no action is the cheapest, but that’s not an option. So the perimeter deck is about 3 million dollars less expensive in capital costs than the beach option. And then the turning it into a full pool is much more expensive.

CC: What about the issue of the silt and the sediment at the bottom, because there’s concern about the degradation of the environment, not just for the swimmers in the area but also for the aquarium on the other side?

RK: No, of course that’s a concern that everybody should have. And it’s actually a concern for all the options that we go forward with, and so it’s being analyzed very closely and in the end it’s not really a show-stopper in the sense that any of the options will have a different result. It’s manageable. It’s manageable through all kinds of protections that already exists. Once we finish with the Environmental Impact Statement we still have to go through all kinds of permitting. One of them will be water quality, so whatever we do within the footprint of the project, whether it’s turn it into a beach or leave it as a perimeter deck or turn it into a pool, we’ll have to make sure we’re complying with water quality rules and everything that the permit entails.

CC: OK. Alright. So, still a very long process to go.

RK: Unfortunately, yes.

CC: OK. So when will we see a final EIS published?

RK: We’re hoping a final EIS is gonna happen this summer. Middle to late summer is when we should get the final EIS. And once that happens we are budgeting to have the design begun almost immediately.

CC: That was Robert Kroning, Director of the City’s Design and Construction. The EIS deadline for comments again is Christmas Eve. Kroning says if there are historical, cultural or safety issues you believe the report overlooks, send in your testimony. For links to the EIS, check our Facebook page, theconversationhpr.

Air date: December 6, 2018 8pm HST

The Waikīkī Natatorium War Memorial was built to honor those from Hawai‘i who served and died in the first World War. A plan has resurfaced to restore the dilapidated and decaying landmark. Some say the pricey plan is worth it; others disagree. What are your thoughts? Join the conversation on INSIGHTS.

Transcript provided by PBS Hawai‘i closed captioning with corrections and quotes by the Kaimana Beach Coalition.

An iconic landmark on Oʻahu for more than 90 years, the Waikiki Natatorium War Memorial was built to honor those from Hawaiʻi who served and died in World War I. the pool and bleachers have been closed for more than a generation due to neglect and decay. A new plan has surfaced to restore the structure but at significant cost. some say it’s worth it, others disagree. What do you think? join the conversation on Insights tonight on PBS Hawaiʻi.

Daryl Huff: Aloha and welcome to insights on PBS Hawaiʻi… I’m Daryl Huff.

Duke Kahanamoku inaugurated the Waikiki Natatorium War Memorial in 1927 when he dove into the pool and was the first person to swim in it. Although the pool remained open for the next 52 years, it was plagued almost immediately with poor drainage and water circulation problems.

Yet one year after it was closed in 1979, it was placed on the National Register of Historic Places and has continued to garner national recognition as an historic site. The government and community have been arguing for years over what to do with the war memorial, proposing everything from demolition to full restoration.

A new proposal was put on the table a month ago. Is this the answer everyone has been looking for?

Our guests tonight include representatives from both the government and the community as well as an expert on the potential impact of climate change on the shoreline area. We look forward to your participation in tonight’s show.

You can email, call or tweet your questions, and you’ll find a live stream of this program at pbshawaii.org and the PBS Hawaiʻi Facebook page.

Now to our guests.

Robert Kroning is the Director of the Honolulu City and County’s Department of Design and Construction. He is a professional engineer by training.

Dolan Eversole is the Waikiki beach management coordinator for the University of Hawaiʻi sea grant college program. He is a coastal geologist.

Kiersten Faulkner is the Executive Director of the Historic Hawai‘i Foundation, an organization that oversees all aspects of preservation programs in Hawaiʻi.

And James Bickerton is an attorney for the Kaimana Beach Coalition, an organization of Kaimana Beach users whose mission is to protect the last local beach on O‘ahu’s south shore from development and commercialization.

Let’s start off with Kiersten Faulkner from Historic Hawai‘i. Can you walk us through the history of the Natatorium and why it was built and why such a facility as opposed to just an obelisk or something.

Kiersten Faulkner: Thank you Daryl. If I can just set the stage a little bit.

World War I was one of the most horrific events of the 20th century. For generations it’s really shaped how we think about world engagement and war. After the war ended in 1918, there was a worldwide effort to remember, honor the dead, but also to say we don’t want this to happen again.

So war memorials popped up all around the world, but they were different than war memorials that we had seen before, from the Napoleonic Wars, or the Civil War, the Revolutionary War, the obelisk you mentioned, the idea was to have living memorials – places where community members could gather, where they could engage in community activities and socializing, they called it the living memorials because the idea was the living would remember why they were able to enjoy the life that we have.

So Hawai‘i, at the time, the Territory of Hawai‘i, decided that this living memorial was necessary to honor the sons and daughters of Hawai‘i who served in the great war. There was a design competition, the territory legislature established the parameters where it would be, it would include a swimming course, at least 100 meters. And they brought a architectural review panel to choose the design.

Daryl Huff: Was the fact that we had this famous waterman, world famous waterman Duke Kahanamoku, famous at the time part of the motivation of having this kind of place?

Kiersten Faulkner: Having a recreational center for swimming, for water sports, was very much a part of it. At the time there weren’t a lot of swimming pools. Natatorium means indoor swimming pool. And so it was a place for that kind of activity to occur. Certainly, Duke Kahanamoku as an Olympian who put Hawai‘i on the map for world water sport, was certainly part of t.

Daryl Huff: Robert Kroning from the City and County. What happened, we mentioned that there was right from the beginning, there were some mechanical issues with it. What happened over time to it and what is the current condition?

Robert Kroning: Well, I think it’s pretty clear the current condition is not acceptable. It’s a blight on the city, on Waikiki.

The original construction behind it, I think, within two years, it started to decay and show some signs of wear already. And through the years, it’s gone through several different efforts to repair it some, and it keeps decaying even more. Until 1979, when it was in such a bad state, that it was just closed for good.

So the problems with it right now are pretty much the visual blight that it provides, that it shows, and then there’s some health and safety issues with it too. Because it’s falling apart into the water, pieces are crumbling off.

Daryl Huff: Do we have a problem with people going on there that shouldn’t be there? Or is it pretty secure?

Robert Kroning: I don’t think there’s been a lot of problems like that. A seal got in there recently, the monk seal, so they get in there when they shouldn’t. But there hasn’t been a lot of problems with people jumping over the fence and getting in there.

Daryl Huff: Jim Bickerton, what is the position of the Kaimana Beach Coalition when it comes to what should happen there?

Jim Bickerton: Well I think first and foremost we’re really interested in making sure that whatever goes in there is open to the public and free. And that’s big deal. There’s very few beaches left that local people can access, and that beach sits at the bottom of ahupua‘a that is probably the most densely populated on on the island. Literally thousands and thousands of people use that beach.

It’s one of the few beaches you can get to, you can park, you can get in the water without having to go past hotels or rights of way, or belong to a private club. We’re very concerned that any of these proposed solutions particularly those that have public/private partnerships, someone wants something in return.

That usually involves a turnstyle, a ticket booth, money changing hands, and that’s usually the end of public open free beach access.

Daryl Huff: During the run up to the show and for many years, there are people who you represent who feel strongly that it should either be knocked down or just moved and just have the memorial stand by itself and restore the beach, right?

Jim Bickerton: Yeah. The thinking behind that is if you look around this island, there’s no public/private partnership on a county beach park. That’s the one thing that the corporations and businesses haven’t been able to get their hands on. We know that’s a tried and tested model.

If you want to preserve open free space at the shoreline, this is the most valuable shoreline the city owns. I mean, it’s worth hundreds of millions of dollars if it were to be developed. So we think that the beach park is the way to go. But we’re very mindful of preserving history and try to accommodate both interests. So that’s why we favored moving the arches back and keeping it as a memorial.

The real attraction for the commercial interests are those bleachers. They seat 2,500 people and the EIS actually talks about putting a stage – floating stage – in the pool. You can see the tour buses coming down, the taxis, and someone who wants to go for a swim after work, where do they go?

Daryl Huff: We talked about the different proposals being floated, pardon the pun.

Dolan Eversole, what is the current status of the beaches there? I mean, we were talking earlier, you mentioned that maybe one of the reasons Kaimana Beach, which is right next to it, is so stable, is because of that existing wall created by the Natatorium. It’s become sort of almost a natural feature in its natural way, hasn’t it?

Dolan Eversole: Yeah, that’s a good way to put it. I think it’s important to put this whole area in the context that it’s completely manmade to begin with. Kaimana Beach is stable by its nature being right next to the Natatorium.

The diamond head, [what] we refer to as the diamond head wall of the Natatorium stabilizes Kaimana Beach and anybody that’s been there will know it’s an extremely stable beach, it doesn’t change much at all. So we have that to attribute to the existing diamond head wall.

But even the Natatorium and Queen’s Beach, as you go through Waikiki as a whole, it’s entirely man-influenced if not manmade. So this is yet one more manmade structure along the coast in Waikiki, but to your point about Kaimana Beach, yes, the current configuration of Kaimana is largely dictated by the Natatorium itself.

Daryl Huff: If you look at, we actually had a picture up that kind of shows this, on the town side of [the] Natatorium, there is really no beach at all. It’s just open reef for the most part, right?

Dolan Eversole: That’s right. Right in front of the aquarium has really no beach whatsoever. It’s shallow reef. Not a great recreational resource as far as swimming and beachgoing, unless you get in the swim channel that’s there. But that’s a classic example of buildup of sand on the updrift side of the structure and the loss of beach on the downdrift side.

Daryl Huff: Yeah, we’re looking at that picture right now and it’s interesting to me that you look at pulling that feature out of the beach. Does anybody know really what would happen?

Dolan Eversole: There are ways to model that. If you [tried] enough experiments, you’ll start to get a general consensus on what could happen. But I think there is pretty general agreement that we don’t want to remove the diamond head groin because that will have a negative impact to Kaimana Beach almost certainly. And I think at EIS and all of the studies I’ve read have recognized that.

So I’m personally not that concerned about destabilizing Kaimana Beach with anything i’ve seen thus far, because it does retain that diamond head end of the groin.

Daryl Huff: Kiersten Faulkner from the Historic Hawai‘i Foundation. What has been historically your folks’ position on what should happen with the Natatorium and when you hear what Dolan Eversole is saying about it being sort of an unnatural condition, has that, what have you folks argued should happen when that Natatorium over the years?

Kiersten Faulkner: We’ve always said it should be preserved. And part of preservation is first stabilizing it. Robert mentioned its deteriorating condition and the fact that it’s unsafe. So certainly, stabilizing it. Part of that is that diamond head sea wall and holding the sand in place.

But beyond that, there’s opportunities to – we call it rehabilitation, which it to bring it back into useful life while retaining its historic character and the design features. One of the things I’m excited about with this new alternative is that it keeps that historic character, but it really reengineers the swim basin portion of what is under the water surface. So the way it works is fixed so that it’s ocean fed and powered by the waves, but the look and the feel and the features are retained. So I think that hybrid approach is really powerful and actually a very elegant solution to the problems that we’ve been talking about.

Daryl Huff: Let me read some comments that are now coming in from our audience. Again, looking back at the history.

“I support it”, I guess retaining it.

“It is an iconic landmark and those who are around to enjoy it remember it fondly.”

“My great grandmother dedicated to my great grandfather after he died, so it has family as well as historical significance for me.”

Jim Bickerton, let me ask you, when you advocated for changing this facility, what kind of push back do you get from the people who just feel like it’s just too precious to mess with in that way?

Jim Bickerton: We, actually, the newspaper periodically runs the poll on this question. And I know it’s not scientific, but the majority and first place position is typically the county beach park option. So I don’t, haven’t found tremendous push back except from I would say people, it’s certainly older people, maybe, to some extent, but the current generation, we don’t see that at all.

And they recognize that times change and this is a much more density populated – you think about when the Natatorium was built, there was only two hotels in Waikiki. So there was this wide expanse, you didn’t have to just tie up this land. It’s a big thing, [it’s the] size of a football field.

Now that the hotels and buildings have hedged us all in and everyone is scrambling to get their little corner where they can get to the ocean, I think people worry less about using that much space for the memorial. You don’t need, no one else in Honolulu has that kind of space.

Daryl Huff: For all of you, Robert Kroning first of all, when you came in to start working at the city, and inherited this situation, what kind of ideas were being thrown around and what kind of conflicts did you find, political conflicts, one question I want to read from a viewer.

“Will this be the decade a decision is made on the future of the Natatorium?”

We’ve been arguing about this 30 plus years. 40 years.

Robert Kroning: That’s true. And unfortunately, there are a lot of things we could laugh about on this. But it’s really, it is sad that it’s still in this condition. So when I took – one of the nice things about my role in this, is that I can truly just remain objective.

So you know, some of the things that Jim has been talking about, on preferences, so forth, and you know, the feedback he gets is turn it into a beach versus, I see that. That’s part of the analysis, but there’s so much more to it than that.

When I inherited this, as you mentioned, it was at a point where many attempts had been made to do something. There were made lots of progress to come close to demolishing it, I think in the fifties. Then there was another effort that was going to restore it in the 90s, in the early 2000’s. It was going to be fully restored, and then that didn’t happen.

And so I got it and the current mayor – and politicians through time, some of them wanted to keep it away from them and not touch it at all. And others said no, I’m going to try to tackle this. So Mayor Caldwell has decided he thinks something needs to be done.

Because that’s most of the feedback everybody, no matter what side you’re on, pretty much says, something needs to done. That’s the common theme everybody says. And then we diverge from there. So I just look at it, and what’s the best for the City & County of Honolulu. And for the people of O‘ahu. And so I do it objectively. And that’s where the EIS helps in doing the analysis.

Daryl Huff: We’re going go back to that for a little bit. First, we did go out and talk to some people who actually use the beach over there and got a couple of interesting opinions, let’s listen to that tape right now.

Joe Lee: Beach volleyball.

Interviewer: Can you explain? What do you mean, beach volleyball?

Joe Lee: Just fill it in with sand and put up a couple of nets and just have beach volleyball. and they got it down by walls, it’s a big event now.

Maltbie Napoleon: Personally, I’d like to see it restored. I remember my grandfather was captain of the lifeguards here in the 40’s. And it was even back then, it was – to keep it up, to maintain it, it was a big job back then. But now, in present condition, you’re looking at a big expense, I think. So – but it would be nice to be able to keep the majority of it that’s here, that you see.

Daryl Huff: We did get a caller asking exactly, why don’t they convert the pool to a beach volleyball dual court. What kind of ideas, other than that, have been explored or floated over the years?

Kiersten Faulkner: Well, some of the ones we’ve heard of course the volleyball court. I’ve heard of dolphin shows, about hula shows, you mentioned floating platforms for performances. I mean there’s been lots of just kind of brainstorming and concepts and people saying, wouldn’t it be great if.

What’s nice, and Robert mentioned this, but the Environmental Impact Statement really is more about what’s feasible. What is technically appropriate, what meets all the standard and criteria. And just someone sitting around saying, hey, let’s grow coral polyps there, that’s not something that meets all of those standards and criteria.

So I think it’s exciting and fun when people start to say, what if this, what if that, but when it really comes down to what’s possible, what meets our goals as as society, what can we afford, what honors the veterans, what protects the environment, what provides public access? All of those things need to be weighed and balanced.

Daryl Huff: Jim Bickerton, when these hula shows and floating shows and all of these other things [are] proposed, it’s usually because of the need for revenue to maintain it. Because once you invest in this, it’s going to have to been maintained. And that sounds like exactly what you’ve been concerned about, is that someone will turn it into a commercial activity there in order to maintain the facility.

Jim Bickerton: That’s really almost inevitable. When you realize how big it is and how much money it takes to run, the expense, just the annual expenses, but also the capital improvement, where does that money come from? The mayor in very first press conference mentioned, we’re looking for a public/private partnership. That’s a code and it’s not a very well disguised code these days, we know what that means. It means branding it, it means having corporate sponsors and then they want something back.

And that’s something that really people should be on their guard about, because there isn’t another stretch of beach left that we can all move to when we want to go for our recreation in Honolulu. Just regular people who just want to get the in the ocean after a hard day’s work. We all have very cramped housing. One of the things about living in paradise is we say, well, we can go to the beach at least. If you can’t do that, what’s the point?

Daryl Huff: Another viewer weighs in.

“Restore the war memorial and keep the ocean front natural. Don’t let money hungry developers get their hand on it.”

Let me ask, Dolan Eversole, when you have a structure that’s stuck out in the ocean, like this, what are the pressures? How difficult is it to maintain something like that? Are we doomed to have a structure that is always going to be very expensive to maintain?

Dolan Eversole: Well I guess that would depend on how it’s constructed. One thing I can say is it would be near impossible to build a new structure like what he have there now. The regulatory world that we live in would really not allow a lot of the structures that we see in Waikiki now. We used to dredge the reef in Waikiki to make swim areas, you’d be thrown in jail if you did that now.

So there is that element to this project where it was done in a time when you could do those things and would be really difficult if not impossible to create a new one, not to say you couldn’t replace it, but to create a whole brand new one would be really impossible.

But as far as the construction and the maintenance, depending on how it’s constructed, there are much better building techniques than there were in 1927, of course. So we would expect this to last a lot longer. I’m not an engineer, I can’t speak to how much maintenance would be required, but if it’s typically concrete and marine grade construction, there would be probably some maintenance occasionally.

But depending on how it’s designed, it should withstand fairly well. What I will say, however, is our coastline is subject to a number of natural hazards, including tsunamis and hurricanes and the inevitable sea level rise, which is creeping on us. So those are all factors that need to be thought about and designed for. We’re not going to be able to hold back a tsunami, but you might be able to design it so there might be give away sections that prevent the whole complete failure. We [were] just talking about that earlier, that one potential catastrophic event could destroy the whole thing, and that’s true throughout Waikiki.

Daryl Huff: Just in general terms, I know sea grant doesn’t want to take a particular position on the Natatorium, but generally speaking, would you advise people to build structures on the shoreline any more?

Dolan Eversole: That’s a great question. I do a lot of work in Waikiki. As you know, there are ambitious plans to re-envision Waikiki in different parts. And that’s primarily focused on the beach. So we’re very focused on being able to maintain, preserve and in some cases, restore beaches in Waikiki. And I’d like to make the point that Waikiki is different than other places for a whole bunch of reasons.

It’s an urban environment, it’s an urban beach, and so I think it allows a little bit more flexibility on what’s possible. For example, we probably would never think of building groins and sea walls and things like that at Sunset Beach on the north shore. It’s a dynamic natural beach, so you can contrast north shore to Waikiki as kind of the two end point extremes. So I think in that context, it does allow a little bit more creativity in what’s possible in a place like Waikiki.

Daryl Huff: Mr. Kroning, call for you. Who was on the committee to draft the plans for the perimeter deck, what was the motivation to come up this with plan? It’s a pretty good question.

Robert Kroning: It’s a great question, and actually, I was wanting to jump in a couple of times.

Daryl Huff: You guys can all jump in any time you want.

Robert Kroning: ‘Cause we’re already talking about some of the alternatives and given some opinions on that. So if I could at first, let me cover first of all, the EIS has a breakdown of all the different alternatives, Environmental Impact Statement which –

Daryl Huff: Let me roll you back just a little bit. Frankly, I’ve read a lot of EIS’s over the years and a lot of times, they are sort of pointed toward – I won’t say pointed toward a conclusion, but toward a particular project. Was this EIS designed from the front end to lead to the restoration of the Natatorium?

Robert Kroning: Right. So actually, when you submit your EIS, you have go in with a proposed, preferred alternative. And so that’s been done. And the preferred alternative we now have is something we call a perimeter deck.

But if I could first talk about a few things, concern about the private partnership, public partnership, I think the Mayor did mention that in one of his meetings. And it’s been taken as Jim has said, to be understood as well, that’s going to be a revenue generating type of event. And in fact, that’s not what he really meant.

What he’s talking about is – hoping, because there’s been some non-profits, organizations that have said they’re more than willing to support through funding it without any strings attached, because that’s what they want. So if the alternative that we select is something that they support, I think there’s some non-profits out there that would like to help fund it. So that’s kind of what he’s talking about, private support in that way.

Where I was leading to on the Environmental Impact Statement, and analysis that’s been done so far, it provides costs and a lot of the information about how much this is going to cost.

Daryl Huff: How much is it going to cost?

Robert Kroning: Right now, it’s three, actually there’s four alternatives. One of them, do nothing, which always has to be one. Basically, you’ve got this perimeter deck option we’re talking about. We’ve got the turn it into a beach option. And we’ve got restore it fully to where it even meets the pool rules options. That being the most expensive because you’ve got all the mechanical systems and stuff that have to support that and it’s a full reconstruction. The next most expensive is actually the beach. So some of things that Jim hasn’t covered is there are maintenance requirements on the beach also. One of them being you have to bring in sand every once in a while and replenish the beach, which costs money and it’s very difficult to do, and there’s other requirements. Capital cost similar, capital cost is actually a little more, to turn it into a beach.

Jim Bickerton: I think that was a little rigged from our perspective. We read the numbers, and we think there was a little fudging that went into that.

Robert Kroning: That’s why you have the Environmental Impact Statement you can make comments to, to say that. But I’m comfortable with the analysis and the perimeter deck comes in little bit less because we don’t have to have all the mechanical systems. Where the beach, we have to build other structures because if we take away the bleachers, we have to find a place and build a structure for the ocean safety folks that are in there.

So when you talk about the cost and the maintenance concerns and then the private/public partnership, it’s best to go look at the EIS and see all the data. Originally, I would prefer alternative when we first went out with what we call the EIS preparatory notice, we had our preferred alternative was the beach. Because the perimeter deck was not an option.

So the EIS has a lengthy process of checking with all kinds of organizations and different agencies to get expertise information through, throughout. And as we went through what we call 6e consultation, which is this historic preservation type consultation, they basically said we really should look for an interim, a medium preservation option. The reason it wasn’t in there to begin with, is because when the project was stopped in 2000, it was basically stopped because it was designated a pool, and we couldn’t meet the pool [requirements].

Daryl Huff: What are we talking about here? 30 million? 50 million? 100 million?

Robert Kroning: We’re talking about 25 million for the perimeter deck, up to 45ish million for the full pool.

Daryl Huff: And then what was the beach alternative?

Robert Kroning: The beach alternative is about 28.

Daryl Huff: Jim, you’re saying that you feel like that’s –

They also avoid any awkward interaction in the drug cheap levitra no prescription store and therefore get to enjoy the complete benefit of the medicine. So, it is highly preferred by numerous individuals all-round the world. cialis without rx Parents who are committed to having their teen take a driver’s education class should strongly consider looking levitra buy into Texas drivers education courses online. However, risks come in when cheap viagra india the exercise is a fruitful interaction; and knowing is half the battle.

Jim Bickerton: Let me give you couple of examples that jumped out at us right away. First of all, there’s 90 years of silt in that pool, and it’s completely anaerobic, there hasn’t been any current in there, there’s a lot of bad stuff on the bottom, if you will. The beach proposal has a mitigation expense for that. There’s a way they’re going to cover that and put sand over it. The pool? They don’t do that. They leave that out. Now, the way they’re going to build the pool –

Daryl Huff: You’re saying more expensive to do this restoration project than the EIS is saying?

Jim Bickerton: Yes. I mean, and the other thing they’re going to do, they don’t have mitigation for, they’re going to drive piles into this muck to build this deck, this perimeter deck. There’s no mitigation for that, it’s just going to spread out into Waikiki, you’re going to disturb all of that silt. Other example is, they say the pool only requires four lifeguards. That’s where they get the maintenance expense. But the beach will require five. But Kaimana Beach next door just has one lifeguard station. This beach isn’t going to be any bigger than Kaimana, we don’t see five lifeguard stations in a 200 yard stretch of beach.

Daryl Huff: The city [has] now, as I understand it, picked its favorite, right? Of all of those alternatives?

Robert Kroning: If you want to call it that. That’s why I say, for my job, I remain objective. For me, it’s not a matter of favorite or not because it’s not emotional. It’s a matter of what I think is the appropriate selection out of all the alternatives to do with this.

Daryl Huff: Describe how this alternative would work and why you think it will work and survive all of the things that we’re talking about that are going to threaten, all the seaward pressures and stuff.

Robert Kroning: Why would it work as a structure?

Daryl Huff: In fact, we have a couple of schematics that we can put up. If that’ll help you explain it.

Robert Kroning: Right. Well, I think the –

Daryl Huff: Picture up here? This is the current –

Robert Kroning: Current status.

Daryl Huff: And what are we seeing here?

Robert Kroning: That is the ewa facing side of the Natatorium right now.

Daryl Huff: So it’s as if we’re sitting on the beach and looking out at the ocean?

Robert Kroning: Yeah. If you’re sitting in the stands, it’s on the right side looking out into the ocean. The main problem with the current design of the Natatorium is that the, what you see in that photo is a pipe that goes through that rock formation. That was supposed to be the water flow, the natural water flow in the original design. And it wasn’t sufficient enough, so it didn’t really get the water to flow well enough. And then the other problems are the actual material, the concrete that they used was not of the standard that we use today. And the rebar that they used is iron-based which will –

Daryl Huff: Rust.

Robert Kroning: Right. And now, we commonly used stainless steel rebar. So, as far as an engineering adventure, we think the current materials that we have today and the ability and the work that we know how to do in waters and construction techniques today, will have a much better chance of surviving in the water.

Daryl Huff: And if we can show you the second drawing is how the – it would be set up to allow water. If you wouldn’t mind describing what this looks like.

Robert Kroning: So the main reason we came up with this alternative was, again, because SHPD was not happy when we only had two alternatives.

Daryl Huff: The State of Hawai‘i Preservation Division.

Robert Kroning: Historic Preservation Division. Wanted – we only had the turn it into a pool, which is very expensive and lots of maintenance with mechanical systems and so forth, or the beach. And they said, well we want you to look at options that at least preserve a little more of the structure. And we actually went through two iterations. We went through once, basically took the beach, but kept the bleachers. Everybody [that was] asked about that, said no way. That’s not an option.

So we looked into it a little more and came up with this option, which was at first something that we didn’t think might work because of the pool rules. We have to – the pool rules are a little vague. It defines “swimming pool” as a manmade structure that contains a artificial body of water. “Artificial body of water”, that’s all kind of subjective.

Daryl Huff: What’s artificial anymore, right?

Robert Kroning: Exactly. So we didn’t know whether something like this would even be accepted by DOH as a pool. But we came up with this. This allows, so what you see here is the wall now doesn’t come all the way down to that rock formation and it allows water to flow through so it’ll circulate much better. And then what you don’t see here is the actual makai wall which will be all basically a grate allowing water to flow in and out, flow in and out. And when we presented this to DOH, they said, yes, this would not be classified as a pool. Which then saves a lot of money and makes it a much more easy project for to us maintain.

Daryl Huff: Let me ask, Kiersten from Historic Hawai‘i, this is changing it, but is this changing it too much for you folks?

Kiersten Faulkner: That was a big point discussion for all of us. There’s the kind of extremes of “tear it all down” to “keep it exactly as it was designed”. And in between is basically this solution. It’s a compromise. And I know there are people who think it’s kind of gone too far the other way. I’m not among them. I think it really does save that character and that feel and that association, that we all associate with the Natatorium while still addressing these issues of water quality, water safety, security, and build, being able to build it and manage it. So there have been some people who are concerned, but overall, I think it really has addressed all of the preservation issues that we’ve brought up.

Daryl Huff: Dolan Eversole, I don’t know if you had a chance to evaluate this scientifically, but does it satisfy you as a person concerned about the shoreline, that it is a good compromise?

Dolan Eversole: Well, I thinks that word compromise is a really good, this is appropriate use of that. And as I read through the EIS, I saw repeated mention of pros and cons to the different designs. And I think that’s something we all have to keep in mind, that – is it perfect? Maybe not. But certainly, there’s benefits and drawbacks to every approach that you might take.

As far as the beach goes, from a process standpoint, the preferred alternative, I don’t feel will have a negative impact on Kaimana Beach, if that’s the ultimate concern. I think it will remain as is. I do have a couple concerns about some of the more technical details with the grate, what does that grate look like, how does it work. But those are relatively easy questions as far as talking with engineers and figuring out what does that really mean.

Backing up from 10,000-foot level, how will this impact the beaches, I don’t think it will have any significant impacts to the beach. There are some other concerns. Water quality is one of those. I do share the concern Jim has about the silt on the bottom. I think need to look at that a little closer. But again, those are not deal killers necessarily, they are just things we need to look at a little more carefully.

Daryl Huff: So Jim Bickerton, what are you guys concerned about [with] this design?

Jim Bickerton: Well, if you’re just focusing on the pool design itself, we do see some concerns. There was many years ago, and people forget this, a little boy on a school trip to the Natatorium when it was still open, drowned there, and they missed him. They didn’t see him because it was so murky. And they got back to the school and discovered that he was missing. And that was why the pool rules were kicked in. And any time you have a public pool, it’s calm. You attract the weakest swimmers. Those of us that want to go out in the surf, no problem, we’ll go next door. But you get a lot of weak swimmers and visitors who are not familiar with the water. You have this untested anywhere in the world as far as we know, this grid or mesh system. It has to be small enough so that little kids hands don’t get stuck in it. But big enough so that algae and barnacles and limu and all kinds of things don’t grow on it.

Those pipes that we were looking at, those big old pipes that went through the wall into the pool and drained it, the reason that pool shut down is they filled up with marine organisms. So we’re not clear that you’re ever going to be able to build these mesh structures and then what’s the real maintenance cost of keeping those things clean in the ocean, making sure the pukas remain open for the flow that you need to have to avoid the build up of bacteria?

So that’s why again, why go to all this trouble when we have the solution all around this island of how to use our shoreline.

Daryl Huff: Robert Kroning – so along the lines of what Jim is saying, supporter of preservation, but says, there needs to be never to make sure sharks don’t get into swimming area, this happened in the past. The public safety aspects that Jim Bickerton is raising, how does this plan address that? I find it interesting thought about when you create an attractive nuisance, where it looks really nice, and safe, but maybe there’s currents and stuff under there, are you sure it’s going to be safe for the kids and the tourists and so on who want to go there?

Robert Kroning: Right. We’re definitely going to design it for that. And as far as sharks, the mesh that we’re talking about is actually a series of bars, and they’ll go up and down. So there’s not going to be a grid system that can catch anything. It will be bars and space that the right distance that none of these animals can fit in there.

Daryl Huff: Not a big enough one to do any damage?

Robert Kroning: Right. I’m sure jellyfish will be able to squeeze through, or something, but there’s jellyfish everywhere. So as far as the safety, of course, the lifeguards will be there and if it gets to any point where it looks like it might be dangerous, for some reason it’s a turbid event, we can close the pool. So when it’s too dangerous, we’ll do that.

But the probability of that happening, based on the analyses we’ve done in the area and how often the waves are rough and so forth is infrequent and so the pool will be open quite often. But right, I mean, there’s no expectation that this pool is going be the same type of pool at one of our parks, where it’s just clear – it’s still ocean. And that’s why it’s an ocean flow. And so as people use it, that’s what they have to expect.

Daryl Huff: Will you feel the current? Will it be more like being in the ocean than being in a pool? Or more like pool being in the ocean?

Robert Kroning: You’ll still feel some choppiness and current here and there.

Daryl Huff: When you talk about the climate change and especially sea level rise, how much sea level rise would you say that they should work into this design?

Dolan Eversole: Well, I’m happy to say that the report, the EIS, readily acknowledges sea level rise. And they refer to the recent sea level rise risk and vulnerability assessment that the State of Hawai‘i just completed. So that’s written right into the EIS.

And to answer your question, it depends on your time frame and the state is now starting to adopt benchmarks for sea level rise. And the magic number that is starting to – we’re coalescing around is about 3.2 feet. And the magic question of that, of course, is when. And that’s where it gets a little fuzzy. The recommendations coming out of the State of Hawai‘i now are – we expect at least 3 feet by the end of the century, but we should be planning for it now because it’s very likely it’s going to happen much sooner than the end of century.

Daryl Huff: I know you said it – how much does the EIS envision?

Dolan Eversole: They don’t necessarily pick a benchmark. The EIS mentions that sea level rise will be considered in the final design. We’re not at a place yet where there are any requirements that you build to a certain level. Or design for a certain sea level height. But the guidance coming out is about 3 feet, 3.2 feet is a minimum.

Robert Kroning: And the city has accepted that in all designs we do now. Every project that we’re doing anywhere, and as the Director of Design and Construction, I’ve got about 600 of them I’m doing, they all have to take into consideration sea level rise now. And we’re using that 3.2 number. So when we design this, that will be taken into account.

Daryl Huff: Got several backup questions here and there’s sort of a theme developing. People are wondering OK, how are you going to maintain this thing? I’ve got like four questions. Here’s one that’s pretty indicative.

Maui resident believes Natatorium is iconic, rare, and unique and should be restored, but they should look into a commercial way to make money to fix it and not make it a burden to taxpayers.

Another caller says, “Who is responsible for us getting to this place? They should be held responsible. You could raise money through a GoFundMe or private foundation”.

So really, here’s another proposal. We’re getting a lot of calls actually.

“Build an Olympic size pool on the mauka side of the arcade and turn the existing pool in a beach.”

“Let’s start from scratch.”

Let’s talk about that. Realistically, the maintenance, can we afford to maintain this thing and without some sort of revenue stream?

Robert Kroning: Well – the cheapest maintenance is to do nothing. But as most people agree, we have to do something. So whatever we do, is going to require maintenance. All options require maintenance. It’s a piece of property the City & County of Honolulu has to maintain.

And whether it’s maintaining the perimeter deck, whether it’s maintaining a complete pool, whether it’s maintaining a beach, they all have costs and they all have requirements. So it’s part of parks’ responsibility or I think, if this ends up being a perimeter deck or beach, it becomes ocean safety’s responsibility to maintain.

Daryl Huff: Does the Historic Hawai‘i Foundation, you folks have money to help an organization like the City maintain an iconic site? Is there really revenue streams out there other than commercial?

Kiersten Faulkner: One of the interesting things about having a solid proposal is we’re going to find out. And I know there have been many funders and philanthropists over the years who have said, once you commit to a course of action, the philanthropy will be interested. And certainly, there is more interest in fundraising to restore a war memorial than fundraising to destroy one. And I think that has been part of the conversation. You know, the public/private partnership idea could be as extreme as the commercialization that Jim is concerned about but it could also just be a philanthropic way to support places that matter. And I think when we talk about what are the values that we are trying to aspire to, it’s not just about the cost. It’s also about who are we as a community, who are we as a people, and what does that look like. So I’m interested in seeing what happens next. I think until there’s a committed course of action, there’s nothing to contribute to. So you know, restoring and taking care of a war memorial, I think will attract a great deal of attention from across the world.

Daryl Huff: Jim Bickerton, when we talked about this, I think that many of the folks in your coalition are swimmers, they go regularly and they swim the shoreline and they have to go out past the Natatorium to do that most of the time. But I mean, couldn’t it possibly be an asset to your constituents that there’s this place you could do laps in the ocean? You see, just think positive about it is what I’m asking.

Jim Bickerton: You know, I’m a fair-minded person. I can see positive in everything. What we’re trying to do is look not just at the immediate, but looking far into the future.

Daryl Huff: Which is what we’re talking about.

Jim Bickerton: Really thinking. I mean, I taught three children to swim. My three kids, I taught to swim there. And my hope is that their kids and their grandkids can have that same experience. And I don’t see the solutions, the other solutions, producing that in the end because of this risk of commercialization.

Daryl Huff: You taught them to swim at the beach, not at the Natatorium.

Jim Bickerton: At the beach, not at the Natatorium, right. I should have been clear about that. So the swimmers have a great experience now. Can you tell them it’s going to be better? We all have this experience with our technology – we’re going to make it better. I like the first model better. It worked better. So that’s the fear that people have. We’re going to – and what Kiersten’s talking about is, I would challenge them all who say that, to say, look, show me a $30 million project that was funded by just goodwill and philanthropists.

Kiersten Faulkner: Sure. Hawai‘i Theater, Pacific Aviation Museum, Bishop Museum, I mean there are dozens –

Jim Bickerton: But are there shows every night at the Hawai‘i Theater? That’s my point. It isn’t like it just gets to sit there and the public just gets to come and use it for free. There’s a quid pro quo. And the theater has to have as well – tickets and people.

Kiersten Faulkner: But let me point out as well, there’s a cost to demolition and building a beach. So that 28 million dollars also has to be paid for. Is the Kaimana Beach Coalition going to raise that money? How are you are you going to pay for that 28 million? So there is a baseline cost to do anything. We need to accept that there is a baseline cost to do anything. And then the delta is what we’re really talking about. So when you talk about having this experience and swimming and teaching your children to swim, that doesn’t go away. Kaimana Beach is still there. The diamond head sea wall still holds that beach. You’ve lost nothing. And then by putting this new opportunity that adds opportunity, brings more people in, it gives more, without taking anything away, it’s a win-win solution.

Jim Bickerton: Well, I would say, where do I go to park my car when the tour busses are there for that stage show. Just like the Hawai‘i Theater has shows, you’re positing a revenue source. You’re going to have competing users, and they’re going to have the money. That’s what it’s going to take. You’re gonna have people filling those bleachers. There’s tens of thousands of people in the hotels just down the road. They won’t have any trouble filling that out for shows. And when that happens, my grandkids, they won’t remember how it used to be.

Daryl Huff: Robert, I was going to say, can you rule out at this point, as a policy, the Hollywood aspect of it as opposed to – how is it going to operate? You’ve got a big grandstand there that you’re going to be maintaining, that you want to use. How do you picture using that if it’s not a revenue stream? Are you ruling out having to develop a revenue stream to maintain it? Talking about maintaining it now.

Robert Kroning: So like said, we maintain all our parks, all our everything, with taxpayer money. And so that’s really the – right now, in the foreseeable future, how we’re going to continue to maintain this because as we talked about, it doesn’t matter what the solution is. The maintenance has to happen and it’s going to be a cost. I’m not willing to guarantee anything about it not becoming somewhat commercialized. But I’m pretty sure it’s not going to. And for that to happen, would require more conversations.

I mean, this EIS and the construction of this facility is not going to include uses of it in commercial type activity. So if for some reason, three mayors down the road, they decide, “you know what, we’ve got a facility there, we should use it for commercial activities” – they would have go through all kinds of public input and everybody would have their say in the matter there. You remember also that this is butts up right against Kapiolani Park, which is very strict about no commercialization. And so it would be extremely difficult to turn this venue into a commercial type activity.

Daryl Huff: There are shows now 2 or 3 nights a week, commercial events at the aquarium. That never used to happen. There was no conversation about that. And it’s just happening. That’s how these things end up working. And so that’s why we have to really look hard at it before you go down that road.

Daryl Huff: OK. Let me get more callers in here.

“Caller’s father fought in the Philippines, and said maintain[ing the] Natatorium was unnecessary. As a memorial, a beach would be a better memorial.”

“Have you considered using Natatorium for ocean safety education for the keikis and tourists for programs like junior lifeguard training”, the ocean safety ‘ohana is asking that.

What other positives, what are the things do you see happening there? Kiersten, maybe you can weigh in. What would you like to see a weekend at the Natatorium look like?

Kiersten Faulkner: I see it as a place [where] families gather where they are teaching keiki to swim but also where it’s a safe place perhaps with people with disabilities to enter the ocean and participate in ocean experiences. I think just as a viewpoint, looking out over the ocean and watching the ships and the sunset, I don’t see it as a commercial venue. I see it as a community venue. And I think that offers a nice anchor to that part of Waikiki, to that part of Kapiolani Park. I see it as an asset to the community, as an asset to the city and to the state. I don’t share this unwarranted fear of what might happen some day if we’re not vigilant. I think we will be vigilant and we can guard against that.

Daryl Huff: Dolan, I’ve been giving you a break and not dragging you into this conversation. But I would like to hear your perspective. I mean again, maybe less as an expert, more as a person who knows Waikiki, knows the ocean, loves the ocean. What do you think about this? What thoughts come to mind when you have this conversation?

Dolan Eversole: Yeah, I wanted to kind of take off my university that for a minute and just tell you me personal opinion. And full disclosure, I used to be a City & County lifeguard for about 15 years.

Daryl Huff: OK, that’s where I knew you before.

Dolan Eversole: I also recreate in this area with my family quite a bit, so I’m very familiar with the area. I wanted to reflect on one of the comments that came from the viewer about having ocean safety – some kind of headquarters or a station there. There’s a lifeguard tower at Kaimana now. It’s just a single person tower, and they rotate through. And there is a lifeguard jet ski storage facility in the Natatorium now. Regardless of whichever option we end up doing, I think it is a tremendous opportunity to create an ocean safety education center there. And the lifeguards could have a presence there. There could be water safety, junior lifeguard programs as you mentioned. To me, that would be something I would really like to see happen in that area. It seems fitting. It would be something that the community would enjoy. So a multi-use area that could be part educational, and bring the lifeguards into the fold.

Daryl Huff: Let me ask you another question that just occurred to me, from your expert point of view. Pulling out that existing structure, cleaning up whatever stuff is there, is there any way of predicting what the beach would look like after doing that? Would you even have a beach?

Dolan Eversole: That’s a tough one. I think the sediment on – that’s in there now is something that we have maybe underestimating how difficult it is to remove. When you try to remove really fine sediment like that, it gets everywhere, it’s like dust. So that is something I think regardless of whichever option we end up pursuing, that’s something we’re going to have to look at more closely. And it will need to be addressed I think. ‘Cause just leaving it, if you start to expose it to wave energy, it’s going to start flushing and get around, and we’ve had some experience with that in Waikiki in 2012. We did a beach nourishment project and it turned out to be much more fine sediment than expected, and it turned milky.

Daryl Huff: Jim, one last word in, it seems to be 3 to 1. About 30 seconds.

Jim Bickerton: I don’t know, I think Dolan agreed with a lot of the that points we made.

Dolan Eversole: I’m somewhere in the middle.

Daryl Huff: One thing I’ll just throw out event though I know we’re running out of time, is that it occurs to me that Hanauma Bay is a good example of where there’s a lot of commercial activity at Hanauma Bay associated with supporting people using it. Another day we’ll talk about Hanauma Bay and whether it’s appropriately being commercialized or too commercial. But anyway, I want to give everyone a chance to know how they can make their comments, we have a lot of comments from viewers. There is an address and email address you can send public comments to.

The mailing address is to Mayor Kirk Caldwell care of the Department Design and Constructions, which is basically Robert Kroning.

650 South King Street, 11th Floor.
Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, 96813.

You could also send an email to wwwmcnatatorium@aecom.com. I think that’s the consultant’s email address. We will post these addresses at pbshawaii.org if you don’t get them. And you can weigh in on what you think should be future of the Natatorium. And I want to thank all of you for joining us and our guests tonight.

Robert Kroning, Director of the Honolulu City and County’s Department of Design and Construction, Kiersten Faulkner, Executive Director of the Historical Hawai‘i Foundation, Dolan Eversole, Waikiki beach management coordinator for the University of Hawai‘i sea grant program, and James Bickerton, attorney representing the Kaimana Beach Coalition.

This is the last Insights of 2018; our next live show will be January 10, when we will preview the 2019 legislative session. I’m Daryl Huff for Insights on PBS Hawaiʻi. Happy holidays, a hui ho.

Civil Beat Community Voice, November 26, 2018
by Rick Bernstein

A new pool could easily pose a danger to swimmers, both inside and outside the Waikiki war memorial.

The Kaimana Beach Coalition was created in 1990 to protect this precious beach area from commercialization, environmental degradation, and to assure public access to this last remaining beach and gathering place on Oahu’s south shore.

We join with Mayor Kirk Caldwell in favoring a new beach plan as the best option for the Waikiki Natatorium site.

A new draft environmental impact statement is now available for public reading and comments. It presents three distinct plans for the area — the beach plan, full restoration, and a new perimeter deck plan.

The beach plan was fully vetted by a Natatorium Task Force in 2009 and agreed upon by the governor and mayor in 2014 as the preferred plan. The plan includes two L-shaped groins at either end of a new beach that would cover the existing pool bottom and parking pit with new sand, creating an open and stable beach with minimum, if any, sand depletion. Other amenities include a new comfort station mauka of the beach and a newly reconstructed memorial arch situated in line with the seawall.

Removal of the driveway and its parking spots and the addition of a 77-stall parking lot next to New Otani Kaimana Beach Hotel and in front of Kaimana beach is an arbitrary decision made by the city’s Office of Design and Construction and not by the Natatorium Task Force. We consider it a poison pill that has served to create opposition to the beach plan. We recommend that it be removed from consideration.

The entrance to the natatorium pool. The Kaimana Beach Coalition opposes a “perimeter deck” plan for the pool, currently pending before the city. Anthony Quintano/Civil Beat

The Kaimana Beach Coalition opposes a “perimeter deck” plan for the pool, currently pending before the city.

The new perimeter deck plan, which is in service of restorationist organizations, has several potentially fatal flaws.

Flaw No. 1 — The plan calls for using porous, rigid checkerboard-patterned, fiberglass-reinforced plastic grates on the makai and Ewa sides of the pool to replace the existing solid concrete pool walls. This concept poses a danger to swimmers, both inside and outside the natatorium. The system will open the pool to ocean currents and wave surges.

As the full force of waves enter the pool, they will crash against a restraining wall in front of the natatorium bleachers and will be reflected back, creating a surge force proportionate to the size and velocity of the incoming wave. People or children near the pool edge could be sucked onto the grate by this surge force.

Conversely, any snorkeler on the outside of the pool would be subject to powerful hydraulic forces pushing against their trapped bodies. This is a potential drowning scenario. The public needs to know if the grate wall idea has been studied and modeled tested by ocean engineers. We cannot afford to be cavalier about this important safety concern. The stronger the surf, the bigger the risks.

Make sure to take the medicine 45 minutes before buy soft cialis sexual activity. The main ingredient in cheapest viagra tablets that promotes blood flow stimulating the male organ is sildenafil citrate. You can buy Generic viagra discounts by making usage of an online pharmacy store that is meant to sell FDA certified medicines only. It is best known for being the longest enduring ED cheap cialis soft treatment accessible today. Flaw No. 2 — The bottom of the enclosed natatorium swimming pool contains 90 years of degraded, silted sand and seaweed which has, because of anaerobic decomposition, become black and sulfuric muck below its surface. This fine particulate material is up to 16 feet deep in the area below the old diving towers and represents an environmental time bomb if released into the waters and already challenged reef system of Waikiki as it will further contribute to water turbidity and spread with the currents, up and down the coast.

The Memorial Beach Plan: After the two L-shaped groins are constructed and the existing makai and Ewa sea walls are removed, clean beach sand (a minimum depth of 2 feet) to form the new swim area bottom and beach would be brought in. A new replica memorial arch would be constructed and sited to frame the new beach as viewed from the existing Roll of Honor plaque.

Flaw No. 3 — As it relates to the swimming pool, obviously the water quality will be murky and will not pass pool rules drafted for the natatorium by the Hawaii Department of Health. The most important rule states that a 6-inch white disc on the pool bottom must be visible from the pool deck at all times to assure that lifeguards can see drowning victims on the pool floor.

Aware of this, the proponents of the perimeter deck believe that by changing the pool walls from concrete to FRP grates, the pool will no longer be designated a pool, and thereby eliminate the need to comply with health and safety rules (Hawaii Administrative Rules, Title 11, Chapter 10).

This carelessly designed and newly named “swimming basin deck plan” seems to place historic restoration interests before public health and safety.

Flaw No. 4 — In his press conference announcing the EIS, Mayor Caldwell stated that the perimeter deck plan will most likely be a public private partnership. We all know that PPP translates to “commercial venture” for private profit in exchange for up front capital to underwrite construction of a public place. This 2,500-seat stadium in the ocean could become the premier sunset cocktail hula show destination on Oahu with huge financial returns.

Consider the hula show in the stadium followed by a luau dinner at the Diamond Head Luau located steps away at the Waikiki Aquarium, which currently operates four nights a week, and charges $160 per person. This plan would in effect create a financial turnstile on the beach and in the ocean of Waikiki.

A commercial show venue will overwhelm this already crowded public resource.

Imagine an influx of customers and staff for the sunset shows taking up available parking and crowding out the local population. Many local people who cannot afford private clubs, gather here after work for fresh air, peace of mind, picnics, swimming, paddling, sunset viewing and socializing.

A commercial show venue will overwhelm this already crowded public resource and squeeze out the community who counts on this important recreational resource. This park was set aside for the quiet enjoyment of the people of Honolulu by King Kalakaua. Let’s keep it that way.

To summarize, we oppose the perimeter deck plan for the following reasons:

1. No model testing for efficacy or safety, especially the potential suction problem.
2. No public health or safety rules for the swimming pool.
3. Environmental contamination of ocean and reefs.
4. Commercialization.
5. Public access.

All ocean users should weigh in. Please read the draft EIS, especially the perimeter deck plan (Section 3.1, only 7 pages) and send in your comments by Dec. 24, 2018.

Civil Beat, November 20, 2018
by Chad Blair

Chad Blair: Time For Honolulu To Finally Decide On Natatorium’s Future
The city proposes a plan for a new pool and restoration of the fabled but crumbling World War I memorial in Waikiki.

The latest idea for what to do with the Waikiki War Memorial Natatorium was announced Nov. 8, just three days before the 100th anniversary of the end of World War I was commemorated.

That’s fitting, as it seems we’ve been arguing about what to do with the natatorium — which was built as a monument to Hawaii’s men and women who served in The Great War — for nearly as long a time. The natatorium was opened in 1927 but has been closed since 1979.

Supporters of preserving the dilapidated, deteriorating natatorium hailed a new proposal to spend $25.6 million to essentially rebuild the structure, including the outdoor saltwater pool.

The city is now welcoming public comment until Dec. 24 on the draft environmental impact statement for the proposed project. A final EIS could come as early as September.

The natatorium and the Waikiki skyline. Sans Souci beach is in the foreground. If you look closely enough, you’ll spot the author doing laps. Anthony Quintano/Civil Beat

Is the natatorium conundrum, which has bedeviled Hawaii governors and legislatures and Honolulu mayors and councils for decades, finally to be resolved? I have my doubts.

After scanning the 259 pages of the draft EIS and two websites dedicated to full restoration of the natatorium’s place in Oahu history, it’s obvious that the facility has been troubled from the very beginning. Its fate also involves multiple layers of government agencies (the natatorium is owned by the state but operated by the City and County of Honolulu), rules and regulations.

The list of acronyms alone takes up two full pages in the draft EIS, ranging from ACHP (Advisory Council on Historic Preservation) to HIHWNMS (Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National Marine Sanctuary).

The archway entrance to the natatorium pool. Nick Grube/Civil Beat

Equally daunting is the list of permits and approvals identified for what is called the Waikiki War Memorial Complex (or WWMC): There are eight at the federal level, five at the state level and five at the county level.

To put it simply, the natatorium problem can’t be simply solved.

‘Constant Problems’

Less than two years after Duke Kahanamoku inaugurated the pool on his birthday as its first swimmer, the Honolulu Star-Bulletin ran a story titled “When Will Something be Done?” According to Historic Hawaii Foundation’s timeline, the article described the “deplorable conditions” of the natatorium and its grounds.

It turns out that the natatorium’s original design “was never fully implemented during construction due to budget cuts.” The drainage system had “constant problems” and made for “poor water circulation and poor water quality.”

For the next half century, the natatorium would be subject to a series of starts and stops: repair and refurbish plans made and shelved; transfers of management, maintenance and appropriations; closures due to poor water quality, reports on hazardous conditions, orders to demolish and cancelations of said orders.

But the natatorium would also be placed on the Hawaii Register of Historic Places in 1973 and placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1980 — the same year it was padlocked.

By 1995, the National Trust for Historic Preservation named the Waikiki War Memorial Natatorium as one of the most 11 endangered historic sites in the nation. And in 2014 it was designated a National Treasure by the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

The natatorium under construction in 1927, viewed from what is now Sans Souci Beach Park. City and County of Honolulu

The natatorium, the Historic Hawaii Foundation states on its website for the natatorium, “is part of a growing portfolio of irreplaceable, diverse places — from ancient sites to modern monuments — that have been designated National Treasures.”

The nonprofit Friends of the Natatorium describes it as a “living” war memorial and a place for people to be together and “enjoy the freedoms that the warriors purchased with their youth and with their lives.”

But the natatorium is also a crumbling dump, a public health and safety hazard and a monument to government inefficiency and legal wrangling. It is an eyesore for visitors and locals alike, situated in one of the most desirable recreational spots on all of Oahu.

In June of 2017, the natatorium’s sad visage made headlines when Kaimana, the Hawaiian monk seal that Rocky gave birth to, got trapped in the natatorium three times. Fortunately, it was rescued by NOAA’s Marine Mammal response team.

Dishonoring The Dead

The current plan would call for demolishing the pool’s Ewa and makai sea walls and reconstructing a new pool deck on new piles that would, via fiberglass reinforced plastic grates, allow for ocean waters to circulate in and out.

The “perimeter deck” plan, as it is called, would not have to meet the state’s standards for a public swimming pool, something that was central to court challenges brought by the Kaimana Beach Coalition in the late 1990s that ultimately led to halting the latest round of restoration plans.

Illustration of the proposed perimeter deck plan for the natatorium. Construction of a new paved walkway would extend the existing Kapiolani Regional Park shoreline promenade from the Waikiki Aquarium to Sans Souci Beach. The promenade currently ends near the boundary between the Waikiki Aquarium and the project site.

Mufi Hannemann came into the mayor’s office in January 2005 vowing to stop spending money on repair or restoration. A task force was later formed to review alternatives to the natatorium including the possibility of tearing it down and building a replica of the archway elsewhere. In 2012, Gov. Neil Abercrombie even proposed a plan to create a beach volleyball facility.

But the Friends of the Natatorium argue that it is the actual pool — and not the beaux art archway — that honors not only the war dead but the more than 10,000 men and women from the islands who served. By allowing the natatorium to decline, the city and state “shamefully broke faith with and dishonored those World War I soldiers and sailors.”

The Kodak Hula Show circa 1950. The performers are on the lawn near the natatorium. Hawaiian Historical Society Photograph Collection

The Kaimana Beach Coalition, however, worries that there are those who look at the natatorium and see a potential money-maker. They worry that government officials could form a public-private partnership that could lead to the holding of concerts and hula performances.

Here is what the Coalition says on its website:

Women in Film looks like a promising academy but searching the internet proved to be fatal when the impact got enhanced to cause you to be bone dead tired and the last thing you would like to happen to order generic levitra you. An estimated of 10.9 million adult men in the USA suffer from such a problem, and by the age 65, up viagra 100mg pfizer to 25% of men have had erection failure issues. This is the basic dosage which has to be taken by ladies and youngsters and additionally in patients with a known excessive touchiness to any part of the tablet. cialis buy on line Female impotence is unica-web.com cialis on line commonly seen in post-menopausal women; however, it may also occur in women of any age.
Commercialization of the natatorium is not a farfetched notion. The Waikiki Aquarium right next door rents out its facilities for oceanfront events on Tuesdays and Saturdays for $2,000 a pop.

“The mayor’s very first presentation of the new pool design referred to public-private partnerships and the EIS mentions ‘floating docks’ for ‘concerts,’” said Jim Bickerton, attorney for the Coalition.

“And will the tour buses and taxis disgorging the 2,500 tourists diminish the parking and access for the thousands of local people in Manoa, Moilili, Kapahulu, University, Palolo and Kaimuki who don’t have the funds to join Outrigger Club or Elks but would still like to get to an evening swim or paddle after work?”

After reviewing the draft EIS, the Coalition is now concerned about the use of the grate system in the new pool design. They fear it could ensnare surfers or swimmers. Other worries include the potential of stirring up all the sediment that has built up at the bottom of the existing pool.

“It’s strange that an environmental impact statement makes no mention of the 90 years worth of stagnant anaerobic silt on the floor of the natatorium and where it will all go when they finally open it to ocean currents and start driving new pilings into it,” said Bickerton.

He added, “The project seems to have been designed by preservationists, not ocean scientists or pool safety specialists.”

The Friends’ Donna Ching did not return a call for comment. Kiersten Faulkner, the Foundation’s executive director, was out of the office.

‘Place Of Innocent Refreshment’

Some may ask why a swimming pool is the appropriate way to honor war dead. Some might also point out that the War To End All Wars was a bloody, pointless mess that directly led to an even more horrendous world war only 20 years later.

Still, since 1989, the Friends have sponsored a Memorial Day Weekend observance in the nearby park while Veterans Day services have been in the same area held by VFW Post 8616. It is an important rite in an important location.

Keiki swimming at the natatorium, circa the 1930s. Buster Crabbe and Johnny Weissmuller once swam there, too. Hawaiian Historical Society Photograph Collection

And yet, we need a solution. The other alternatives in the draft EIS are to fully rehabilitate the closed-system pool, to develop a beach protected by groins, or to do nothing at all. All three are not preferred by the city because of costs, practicality and purpose.

My take?

I prefer the beach option, but then, Sans Souci Beach is my favored swimming hole. Its French name is translated as “without a care,” and that’s how I feel when I go to Sans Souci, which everyone I know calls Kaimana, which comes from Kaimana Hila, which is another name for Diamond Head.

The Roll of Honor plaque across from the natatorium on Nov. 15, just days after the centennial marking the end of World War I. Chad Blair/Civil Beat

Hawaii Public Radio
November 16, 2018

Transcribed by the Kaimana Beach Coalition.

Catherine Cruz: Let the battle begin.

CC: A new round over what to do about the Waikiki Natatorium has touched off a new alternative for a swim basin and a plan to replace a couple of crumbling walls with a fiberglass mesh. Former war veterans weighed in on the controversy over the weekend on Veterans Day against the backdrop of the War Memorial. We talked to two veterans who both remember swimming at the salt water pool when they were children. Retired Lieutenant Colonel Curtis Manchester shares his memories.

Curtis Manchester: My father and I swam in this pool back in the early ’60’s when I was a little kid and – so it means a lot to me and as a place for people to go to ’cause it was a war memorial and you used to have the cannons up front – it was a place where my father would spend a little bit of time, you know, when I was a young boy, and talk to me about what war was, what his experiences were in World War II, so I think there are very important roles for war memorials in our culture, in our society. This was a very practical one – it had a swimming pool, and bleachers that can be used for all kinds of things, there was even [a] possibility of putting a stage out there and having a concert, but that didn’t happen this year. So they have this role of connecting up with the past, of being a place for families to talk to their children. I know some people where the only place their father would talk to them about their war experience, or their mother, was when they went to a memorial like this and then it was something that brought up these issues.

CC: Manchester hopes whatever is decided it is appropriate for the memorial. And John M. Cummings Jr. said he loved jumping off the pool tower and recalled watching elite swimmers from the U.S. and Japan go head to head.

John Cummings: They called ’em the “Flying Fish”. Nobody could [beat them].

CC: And so, I know that there’s all this discussion about what happens to the future of the Natatorium and the arch…

JC: This place is destroyed already. They didn’t do nothin’. I feel [sorry]. I don’t feel happy about it. I don’t know who was responsible for this.

CC: It’s in bad shape. What are your hopes for the memorial?

JC: They should bring it back. They should retain the pool. I know what they want – they want to make volleyball courts in there, I don’t think so.

CC: You don’t like that idea?

JC: No, I don’t think they should. Fix the thing up, it should have been fixed up fifty years ago.

CC: We also spoke with Jim Bickerton, the attorney for the Kaimana Beach Coalition. He had plenty to say about what the group thinks is wrong with this latest alternative of a modified swim basin over the proposal of tearing out the pool and recreating the memorial arch inland.

Herbalists all over the world laud the adoptogenic properties on line levitra of Tinospora Cardifolia. (Adoptogenic herbs boost body resistance; reduce stress, anxiety and fatigue). By excluding air around the penis, the reverse pressure pulls extra blood from the body into the opponent’s vital points is important for any victorious result https://pdxcommercial.com/order-8890 viagra on line in a hand- to-hand battle. Not necessary all the pills are helpful and important and the bets effective ones, but after a good research and a detailed study about the issue of erectile dysfunction. cheapest viagra no prescription cialis without prescription article free viagra for women The effect lasts 24 hours, which means you can reap the benefits of this drug for hours after taking this medicine.
Jim Bickerton: You know, what’s driven us isn’t any opposition to history. We’re sympathetic to those people who have nostalgia for the old days. We sometimes say that it would be nice if, you know, if you were that nostalgic, why don’t you tear down all the hotels at the other end of the beach? Why do you have to do something with the last bit of public oceanfront that the community is still able to use? That’s kind of been our stance, that it’s really about preserving the ocean experience for the majority of working people in Honolulu.

JB: If you think about this little stretch of coastline, it’s wedged on one side by two exclusive private clubs most people can’t belong to, the Outrigger Club and the Elks Club, and it’s wedged on the other side by a wall of hotels. And the tourists own that beach in front of those hotels. What is the area that this oceanfront serves? It’s the most densely populated two or three ahupuaʻa on the island. You’re looking at Mānoa, Pālolo, some even Nuʻuanu, people coming from the ridges in between those valleys, and then all of Mōʻiliʻili, and Kapahulu, and all around the university. It’s literally a hundred thousand people or more, minimum. And this is their beach. And why are you gonna do any solution that is going to allow other people from other than that group to use it for their commercial purposes, to block them out when the local people want to use the beach, why are you gonna do that? What is the rational for that?

JB: People lose sight of these issues when they talk about, well, we should honor the veterans, and so forth. That’s not what this is really about. It’s about who is going to benefit from and use the last piece of public shoreline in Waikiki. Really, that’s it.

CC: This new alternative with this swim basin – what are the other issues that you have with it?

JB: Well, there are a lot of issues with restoring that much of the Natatorium. One of things, again, focusing on this idea that whatever goes there should be public and free, what happens when you start having large structures and facilities is you get exactly what the Mayor said the other day. His words were, we’re looking for a public/private partnership. I think most of your listeners know by now that that’s a code for somebody’s going to make some money off this deal. And why? Because it’s expensive. It is expensive to build, it’s expensive to maintain, I’ll get into some of the costs of that. The reason that we favored a public beach and just preserving the archways and some of the other aspects of the memorial was we had a win-win. We would not have had to invite in any private corporations into that solution. You can look around this island and there is no public/private partnership at any Honolulu City and County beach park. It’s all public.

JB: And so we think that when you put something together that is this large, remember this is larger than a football field, it’s huge – it requires constant upkeep and maintenance, it requires a lot of money to build and maintain, and that corporation that is paying for that wants to make its money back. It needs to hold events there. We will see, I am sure, [a] stage in the middle of the pool. They’ll use the bleachers for hula shows. Everyone says, oh, that sounds lovely! But you won’t get to go to those hula shows, they’ll probably be priced way out of your league, it’s for the tourists down the street.

CC: So it’s access and commercialism that you’re concerned about?

JB: Those are the number one and number two priorities of our group. But we do have a third one, which is we also believe that it’s important to have a safe and healthy swimming experience, and that the existing swimming experience, which is a wonderful one at that beach – I taught my two older children to swim there, so many people have grown up learning to swim and play in the water there – that beach shouldn’t be harmed, and it shouldn’t be affected. That’s why the name of our group originally is the Save Kaimana Beach Coalition, because most of the ideas, including this one, are going to damage or destroy Kaimana Beach and significantly reduce the quality of the experience. And the reasons for that I can get into. They’re technical, but you’re gonna have not only the access issues but there is 90 years of silt trapped in that basin. And I’ve read this Environmental Impact Statement cover to cover and for this project with this thing that they’re proposing there is not one mitigation step to keep that silt from leaking out into the surrounding waters. And it’ll, you know, when silt has sat there that long it’s black muck. That’s what we understand is there right now.

JB: When they were gonna make a beach there was a – part of the beach plan is a mitigation of that black muck. But that isn’t in the pool plan, and they’re just gonna leave it in there. But the pool is being made open to the ocean at least at one or two ends, so what’s going to happen to that black muck when they build that? They don’t have an answer for that. We’re very concerned that it’s going to enter the water surrounding the area, including Kaimana beach.

CC: So basically degrade the quality of the beach as we know it, and there’s also the marine preserve on the other side?

JB: Correct. And also there’s some safety issues. So, here’s the problem with a – if you enclose the pool, you have to meet swimming pool rules and you have to have certain health quality – you have to have pumps and filters, that’s too expensive for them, they don’t want to spend the money on that. So they want to make it open. But that means that the current flows through it. And yet what they’re going to do is build a mesh wall. I can picture it now. I’m a tort lawyer. I mean, that’s what I do for my day job. And, you know, I can see the lawsuits that are gonna flow from people who got trapped when there’s a large swell running, or the tide is in full flood, we have one of the king tides. You’re gonna have currents running through that Natatorium of several knots. You’re gonna have weak swimmers who are getting pinned against that mesh. And you know, I haven’t seen anything in the Environmental Impact Statement that says this mesh system in the facility that is exposed to ocean currents has been tested anywhere, that it’s safe in any way. I also have to ask, why won’t the same thing happen to this Natatorium that happened to the first one?

JB: The first one had algae and other sea life encrusted all [over] the openings that allowed water to flow through. How do they know that algae and other sea creatures aren’t going to grow on this lovely lattice that they’re building on the sides of the pool to allow water to flow in and out, and that we won’t have the same problem that we had [with the] first pool? That basically it had to be shut down because the circulation stopped, because of the growth of marine organisms?

CC: So to recap, safety because when the waves come crashing against that wall that is there now, it bounces off.

JB: Right.

CC: But in a mesh system basically if you’re swimming there [you] might get pinned against this grid?

JB: It will set up occurrences every surfer and other people who use the ocean know, when the surf is up or the tide is running, currents get set up by all of that energy moving and it has to go somewhere. So it finds a path. And that path is going to be through the pool rather than around the pool when the pool is enclosed. It’ll go through the pool. People swimming in the pool will feel it tugging them towards one side or the other. But then they’ll eventually encounter that mesh wall and they’ll be pinned against it. Now, you or I might be able to hop out at that point, but a little kid? Maybe not. Maybe a tourist who’s visiting, who doesn’t know the ocean or how to swim that well might not be. And then the City’s looking at lawsuits. I don’t know if those are factored into the cost of this strange and untested design.

CC: Now I know the Friends of the Natatorium had said that they thought this was a good compromise, but you don’t see it as a compromise, you see it as a way to be able to commercialize?

JB: Yeah, and that – you know, when we’ve looked at who the people are who are actually in that group, they have a lot of well-meaning members, but the people that actually lead that group all work for design and engineering companies that have a stake in the project. And, you know, without selling their motives too much, we do have to question whether they really care about the commercialization problem, whether that’s really a factor for them. They really seem to only want to get restoration at any cost without looking at whether it’s going to alter the experience that people have in that area.

JB: A hundred years ago, or ninety years ago when the Natatorium was opened, it was a very different world. Public actually owned things and was willing to spend money on it. We now live in a world where even though we are ten times richer than we were ninety years ago, people have decided that we don’t believe in spending money on public things any more, we want private companies to pay for it. But those private companies need to make a profit. And so it’s a very different environment than it was back then, and you can’t go backwards. You can’t achieve a kind of situation that we had back then, even though everyone would love to go back to the old days, you really can’t. We have to live in the modern world. The modern world has people coming from all over the globe bringing who knows what with them in terms of pathogens, you want a pool that’s well circulating. But if it’s gonna be well circulating, you need to have it safe. Years ago [a] little boy drowned in that pool on a school expedition and no one knew about it ’til they got back to school, no one even knew he was at the bottom of the pool. And the reason was the water was so turbid you couldn’t see the bottom. It’s one of the reasons we have the swimming pool rules today. And we don’t see how that problem has been cured.

JB: We also notice that the decks are about four feet off the water and the water at low tide is only about four feet deep. I sure wouldn’t want my kids diving off a four foot platform into four feet of water, that’s a whole [other] set of liability that the City’s exposing itself to. It doesn’t seem like the Environmental Impact Statement has considered any of these issues.

CC: OK. And the public has until the end of next month to weigh in?

JB: Yes. I hope people will read the Environmental Impact Statement and comment on these issues, because I think that the city really has been trying to listen. The problem has been that the restoration group, they had a large amount of funding from one of their members who left her fortune to the group in a will. They’ve been able to make a very nice movie about it, they hold lots of meetings and rallies. Their numbers are not great. Every time there’s a poll in the paper our solution always comes out on top. When we’ve held our actual rallies there’s been hundreds and hundreds of people who’ve come to them. But, you know, they have the microphone right now. It’s Veterans Day, you know, everyone’s thinking about the veterans. And so, you know, they have the stage. But I think that as people really study this and as the City takes the time to look at it, they’ll realize that the solution they worked so hard to come up with – and were sticking to for years – which is the public beach, really is the best solution for the community. We’re all in favor of making sure that that beach is a veteran’s memorial beach and that the truly important aspects of the Natatorium are retained. But as far building a set of bleachers for the tourists? Who needs that?

CC: So the – stripping away everything, the glaring points are this platform, and safety.

JB: The lack of public access that will result from the public/private partnerships that are needed for this kind of large structure, and the health and safety issues and the impact on the surrounding neighborhood and the access of people to the ocean resource.

CC: The public will have until December 24th, Christmas Eve, to submit testimony. For links to the EIS, go to our Web page at hawaiipublicradio.org.

KBC: the Draft EIS can be read at http://808ne.ws/Natatoriumreview.