The Garden Island is reporting this morning that a resident has filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to prevent the removal of the monkeypod trees at the Koloa Marketplace development.
Genereally, a party seeking a preliminary injunction has the burden of showing four things:
A substantial threat of irreparable damage or injury if the injunction is not granted;
the damage or injury outweighs the harm to the party against whom the injunction would operate;
an injunction would not violate a public interest; and
there is a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of the case.
This last requirement is what will doubtless trip up any efforts to enjoin removal of the trees. The likelihood of success on the merits of the case is exactly nil since the case is already over and done and there is a federal court order directly on point which provides in part that
KM [Koloa Marketplace] shall be allowed to relocate, replace and/or remove existing monkeypod or other trees consistent with its landscaping plan.The hearing is calendared for March 13. (Thank you to a commenter for correcting me on the hearing date).
11 comments:
March 13.
These people are grasping at straws. Not to mention dishonest.
"the developers would be heros if they'd just talk to the community".
What a load of crap. There have been public meetings and private meetings with Crazy Carol and Abrams both. Their position from day 1 through the court settlement has been "no development, don't even trim a tree". Why waste time talking to a stone?
Juan Wilson is another. His blog has flat out lies re the number of trees to be cut and lists even those being relocated as "cut down". Dishonesty is a bad way to start or end any negotiation.
Mr. Wilson's "plan" to allow development of site without removing trees goes 100% against everything community has said they did not want for site.
Wilson himself attacks developer, Nelson, for building strip malls set back from street with large parking lots fronting the road.
Then turns around and suggests same thing as his "solution" to preserving trees. That developer should move the shops fronting Koloa Road, which represent a large portion of buildings on site, to rear of site.
Which creates exactly what he and community railed against earlier - a large parking lot fronting road with shops at rear.
Which also puts this large block of buildings in flood plain - directly against yet another of largest complaints of community.
Similar to his and community's complaints about shops being elevated above Koloa Road. Which ignores that design in that aspect is almost exact mirror of existing shops across street - many of which have a boardwalk raised well above street level.
Do not often agree with use of word dishonest in these discussions, however this is case where likely warranted.
One could dismiss layperson for these type issues, but Mr. Wilson should know better as an architect himself.
Simply put record shows Shoppes at Koloa made considerable effort to accommodate community ...including to complimenting historic character of community, addressing traffic issues, and did a full tree preservation study and detailed tree preservation and replacement plan - despite no County law requiring it.
Despite those efforts, despite even community's own historic consultants positive comments about design, and that developer has made far greater effort to respect and preserve trees than legally required, they are still attacked and vilified by very small group.
Mr. Foster validly points out latest suit is ill-advised ... it is frivolous as well. This issue has been adjudicated and is already the subject of a valid court order.
These continued efforts do nothing but to further damage and divide community and continue to cause irreparable harm to relationships between commmunity and developers - which had made signficant progress through area traffic plan process.
In end, as in each prior case, community will lose as a result of a small handful fighting unreasonable , unfair and unwarranted battles.
Dead on.
The real goal is to minimize if not prevent development. That's a valid viewpoint but why not just be honest about it instead of flinging everything thinkable against the wall and hoping something sticks?
you have to admit, the architect's drawing does look quaint and inviting with the big shade trees and all
It sounds like that corner could be pretty nice. I guess the plan calls for trees there and park benches.
Looking at plans, while not extremely detailed, shows a welcoming "gateway" with landscaping, trees and walkways. at corner
The canopy shown in drawing appears more than will initially remain, as several of larger trees at corner will be lost. Initial review appeared could have been saved, as they are outside building footprints.
However closer inspection shows pathway leading from street level up into project, which appears to be ADA access to site, coupled with grades, make those trees hard to save.
ADA walkway and related landscaping help blend street to buildings elevation, which are higher than the street. Instead of wall end up with softer landscaped, terraced look at corner - much more welcoming.
Still are several of large existing trees at corner, and one around corner fronting Koloa Road, saved, which will still provide significant mature overstory canopy.
Which appears will be supplemented by new large (12") nursery stock and other landscaping in area.
By preserving a number of older trees overstory, taller, canopy will in significant part remain. Supplemented by lower canopy on large nursery stock, which will grow into larger overstory over years.
New trees have several advantages.
With longer life expectancy they insure long term "look" and health of canopy at site.
New trees can also be "managed" to grow well and healthy and can have root systems "trained" to be less problem to surface structures etc.
Overall, long term preservation, viability and health of trees on site are improved by mixing old growth with new.
Developers tree preservation and replacement plan shown, despite loss of some trees intitially, appears will result in net long term improvement to site and to goal of preserving unique look of area.
The Developer's Handout 12/2007 (avail on KCA website):
http://koloacommunityassociation.com/Project_documents_folder/Monkeypod_project_files/Developers_handout_to_koloa_merchants_ Dec_2007.pdf
... provided most recent information on the project, including a colorized site plan.
The Photo Album (at KCA website):
http://koloacommunityassociation.com/Flash file/image_gallery.html
... of the trees shows pictures of the trees.
A review of photos and detailed tree preservation plan "Tree Map and removal analysis" (at KCA website):
http://koloacommunityassociation.com/Project_documents_folder/Monkeypod_project_files/Tree_Map_and_removal_analysis.pdf
.... clearly shows which trees are proposed for removal, saved, and which are being replaced with new nursery stock.
These 3 docs allows a rational view of the reality vs the rhetoric.
Important to note that size of canopy on tree map not necessary represenative of actual canopy - see Tree 2 for example, which shows as small - but which actually is quite large
Photo album does not unfortunately identify trees in sufficient detail to understand full context.
First album photo says "Tree 2" but actually shows trees 1 and 2 - same basic tree with two trunks side by side. Tree 1 is more important trunk towards street - healthier tree with significant canopy. Tree 2 is trunk away from street with less canopy. Reality appears to be majority of tree shown as "Tree 2" is actually being saved. More important part of tree fronting Koloa Road and canopy over Koloa Road is actually being saved.
Reading "Tree Map" and trying to compare to photo album would lead one to believe entire tree shown in photos as tree 2 is being removed - which is not correct.
Tree's 4, 5, 6 and 7 are set back somewhat from both Maluhia and Koloa Roads - and are adjacent to or in building footprints. Also as noted grade changes in this area to accommodate ADA ramp and ladscaping. As such unable to be saved. Shown as being repalced with large nursery stock.
Tree 8 is higher value, fronts Maluhia Road and is preserved.
As are trees 39, 40, 41, 42, 43 and 44 which also front Maluhia Rd as it enters Koloa. Along with "interior" trees 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 28.
Tree 31, 32 and 33 at the post office are shown as being removed - it would appear because of grade changes and large unruly root systems. Appear to be mistakenly identified as 25, 26 and 27 in photo album (trees in front of post office). Shown to be replaced with 3 new large nursery trees in same location.
By all appearances seems "Tree Plan" saves most all high visibility trees fronting Maluhia Road and also important Tree 1 fronting Koloa Road. Majority of "interior" trees are proposed to be saved as well.
Trees removed being replaced with new, healthy large nursery stick which will grow and insure canopy will reamin healthy well into future.
Rational dispassionate review of facts seems to show "Tree Plan" does what community asks ... protects majority of high visibility trees along Maluhia, and Koloa Rds, along with a signficant mature canopy of interior trees & replants large nursery stock to replace trees removed.
Preserved mature canopy helps insure "feel" not lost and new stock will insure same "feel" is preserved well into the future.
Seems exactly what a well reasoned tree plan should do.
Makes one wonder if worth animosity fomented by few - what did community gain, and what was lost seem good questions here
It's ugly, what are you looking at. Open your eyes. This isn't just any shopping center, it is half of KOLOA mainstreet. Qaint, nice corner...benches trees...oh please, you describe any commercial blob. Wait 'til the rains too.
It used to be designed / conditioned in keeping with the community wishes, area development plan and simply to mainatin some of the town's character. that also included ... yes...most of the old trees.
Palm trees are now in the design...what the hell is that.
As soon as developer found his loop hole, the plans changed, he got his way with town and planning and a weak county attorney settled.
It's a friggen developer, knutsen or whatever, it's all good. don't make this into something it's not. They live for today and those attached to the community live with it forever.
And anonymous, you've got real bad breath dude. What a creep. Leave those nice folks alone.
Koloa Comm Assoc website has Tree Plan, and Dec07 developer handout provided to community showing current project design.
Have not seen any indication plans have changed.
Mr. Wilson posts a June 2006 letter - over year prior to settlement - from community hired historic architecture expert, Ms. Spencer Lienweber, regarding the design.
Some of her "professional design advice concerning the integration of these projects better into the historic character of Koloa" include:
"There are design elements that support the overall character of Koloa ... overall design incorporates;
... wood frame and single story along Koloa Road and Maluhia Road
... buildings are ... broken up into smaller scale elements to appear as independent buildings.
... is a variety also to street setback that reinforces this feeling.
... Shops appear to have large wood framed storefronts in the character of Koloa.
.... the one 2 storey building it is set within parking lot substantially back from road ... scale also appears to be appropriate to Koloa.
... plan has generous landscaping which is laudable, but it should reinforce the character of Koloa.
... there was a geometric and modern pool and walls at the corner of Maluhia and Koloa Roads ... inappropriate to character of the community."
This is KCA community expert - did include some concerns - but was clear scope, scale and design of the buildings are complimentary to historic Koloa.
Also appears her advice on pool & walls at corner addressed as current drawings show landscaped area with curved pathway & stepped walls rather than "geometric/modern" design.
Addressing this concern is possibly responsible for loss of several trees, might have been saved with taller retaining wall.
Another example of conflicting community issues is Mr. Wilsons web comment:
"Even at this level of detail it is clear that Koloa marketplace will "loom" over sidewalk with a high lava wall against the side walk."
This in response to developer drawing Mr. Wilson includes at his site:
http://tinyurl.com/2ypbp7
Yet just above on same page also shows this photo of Lapperts:
http://tinyurl.com/2z2asb
... which is almost exact replica of Koloa Shoppes design sketch complained about.
By all appearances is for preserving look, feel and style of existing Koloa unless actually looks like existing buildings?
Seems "community" problems are illustrated by "palm tree" concern. Tree Plan includes many large new monkeypod & appears to add palms as well for accent - increasing overall tree count on site. Yet even adding trees now appears to be an issue for concern.
Project is half of mainstreet, that is correct.
Yet community's own historic consultant states design "supports the overall character of Koloa".
Change is difficult for some. And yes, change is not always positive. It is legal and allowed however, and owners deserve private property rights be protected.
Seems ironic in place holds private propery rights in such high regard - in State where historic property rights receive some of strongest legal protection in country, that some feel others are only entitled to their property rights if it agrees with the non-owners beliefs ...
Since long links do not work well here are new "tiny" links to;
Tree Plan:
http://tinyurl.com/28ma8l
Developer Dec07 Handout:
http://tinyurl.com/2edvwb
and Tree photo album:
http://tinyurl.com/2gvs8z
all from
http://koloacommunityassociation.com
website "Projects" page
As aside - personally believe developer could save a couple more trees.
One or two of 3, 4, 5 and 6 could probably be saved with a reconfiguration or slight reduction in size of those buildings.
And one, two or all three at post office might be saved by eitehr moving grocery slight to rear, or reducing size by a dozen feet or so. A street level "garden plaza" might be constructed around one or all of these trees and make nice area to eat lunch purchased at grocery deli.
That said - in both areas new large nursery stock being plan ted.
Which as noted is short term negative but long term insures number of trees in prime locatiosn fronting road will be healtier and longer lived.
Thus insuring "look" of Koloa be preserved longer overall - which seems worthy tradeoff ...
Post a Comment