Michael Schmidt of Coldwell Banker Bali Hai Realty has lowered himself a little further with a distinctive offering: the house that Joe Brescia built atop burials at Naue.
Yes, for a cool $5.5 million cash –
or a mortgage of $25,100 per month — you, too, can have the
pleasure of living in a cemetery, of resting your head upon a pillow,
knowing that iwi kupuna lie beneath the pillars that support the
house, of eating, drinking, pissing and shitting in a place where
kanaka of long ago laid their loved ones to rest.
Until Los Angeles developer/speculator
Joe Brescia desecrated them so he could build — and now flip —
yet another house along that once stellar shoreline. And the county
and state went along, because nobody wanted to risk a “takings”
lawsuit by telling Joe, “No, you can't build such a big ass house on
a lot with at least 31 burials.”
Neither the real estate ad nor the
promotional video make any mention of the iwi kupuna beneath its
foundation and under its lawn, nor of the angst that accompanied
every step of its 2010 construction — the protests, the lawsuits,
the arrests, the vigils, the pain, the tears, the anger, the anguish.
Only that, "Years of planning went into building this newer, well-maintained home." Mmm hmm.
Only that, "Years of planning went into building this newer, well-maintained home." Mmm hmm.
Nothing is said about the dreadful
precedent this house set of undercutting the authority of the
Kauai-Niihau Island Burial Council when the state interpreted its
decision to “preserve in place” as meaning it's OK to build right
on top of iwi kupuna.
As I previously reported in the
Honolulu Weekly, Brescia's house marked the first time the State
Historic Preservation Division overrode a Burial Council and
permitted construction on a previously identified burial site. As
Alan Murakami, the Native Hawaiian Legal Corp. attorney who litigated
the case, noted:
They just absolutely caved in response
to development pressure. What is the point of having a Burial Council
if they can only determine how high or how wide the buffers [around
burials] can be? That’s a huge constriction on the power the Burial
Councils previously had.
The ad does say “over 150' of white
sand beach frontage wraps around the property which is widened by a
legendary reef tombolo while also creating amazing privacy.”
But it doesn't disclose that Brescia
stole much of that sand from the public with the blessing of Chris Conger — the
same guy now advising the county on revisions to the shoreline
setback law — and his “no history” approach to setting
shorelines. Though that approach has since been thrown out by the
Hawaii Supreme Court, Brescia has incorporated a large swath of
public beach into his lot and landscaping, and we'll never get it
back.
No, in the realm of advertising, it seems that Brescia's house also has no history. There's only the now of selling “this pristine home” for a hefty profit with the
disingenuous promise: “Years of enjoyment can be yours today at
Kaonohi Point.”
Really? What joy can ever be found in the heartbreak of others?
On a much happier note, let me close by saying the
outpouring of support expressed in the comment section of my last post filled me with gratitude and appreciation for the
wonderful readers who spend part of their day with Kauai Eclectic.
Mahalo to all of you!
[Note: This post was corrected to show that Coldwell Banker, not Hawaii Life, is the listing agent.]
[Note: This post was corrected to show that Coldwell Banker, not Hawaii Life, is the listing agent.]
selling paradise is that a Barca campaign? His main supporters not only selling paradise, but the sickest kind, the kind that caused so much pain to the local community. It should be torn down, not sold.
ReplyDeletebarca say it aint so, do you support this kind of business?
Hawaii Life Realty agents have the heart of Kauai in their political pursuits.
ReplyDeleteIt is unfair to characterize these Hawaii Live real estate people as not caring for Kauai just because they took a listing.
Hawaii Life and Bali Hai Realty do most most of the expensive homes on the North Shore. These companies have made a stand politically.
It can be confusing selling and developing land and at the same time supporting Hooser, Bynum, Chock, Yukimura and Barca and the anti-development theme that is the mainstay of these politicians.
I support Bali Hai and Hawaii Life. I respect that they make public their political convictions.
These companies are providing a valuable service to the North Shore and all they are trying to do is support their families. Plus these companies have wonderful agents on their staff.
If it's against GMOs, Barca and his groupies would take money from anyone. They have one issue because having more than one is too brain-hard. The nice thing about fighting GMOs is it's unwinnable, so they can carry on, raising money and feeding their narcissistic self image of being warriors against evil, forever. They use the same arguments from 15 years ago, and will use the same arguments in 15 years, because they are not bothered by facts, studies, or data. It's like ChemTrails and alien overlords - perfect "issues" to occupy themselves without having to worry about learning, changing, backing up what they say, or actually doing anything.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, taxes, budget, corruption, land use, development - people expect results, and it would take work and study to accomplish anything. How do you fix those with Facebook memes, free concerts and parades? You can't, so Barca isn't interested.
So both Hawaii Life and Coldwell Banker listed it?
ReplyDeleteColdwell Banker is the official listing agent. Hawaii Life is pimping it on their website.
ReplyDeleteMaybe a nice aha kapu on the beach in front of the house would be in order. A kahuna ana ana could curse the place and people for the desecration of the iwi. It would certainly make plain this is no ordinary affront, and the sellers, purchasers and realtors could take their chances. Wall Street Journal's "Mansions" section would love the story.
ReplyDeleteBeware of the chuck laskers. They live here a couple of years and from the get go think because they live here, now they're locals, and insert themselves into every issue with that self righteous attitude "the saviour on the white horse". They bring the worst of that mainland haole mindset, " I'm here now, I can help you" A budding hooser or bynum in the making.
ReplyDeleteOh, and P.S. this aint haole bashing, it's attitude bashing, I'm a haole and no shame.
Please 11:19 enough of how much beal/norman care for everyone & everything on kauai "pure shibai". They have demonstrated time & time again how clever they are at using support of their causes to cloak their real motives
ReplyDeleteie:profit. If you're not presently their pr firm you should be.nice try.��
I hereby nominate Anonymous 11:19 for the annual "The-Devil-Made-Us-Do-It Excuse Of The Year" award.
ReplyDeleteIt is unfair to characterize these Hawaii Live real estate people as not caring for Kauai just because they took a listing.
Joan said, “But it doesn't disclose that Brescia stole much of that sand from the public with the blessing of Chris Conger — the same guy now advising the county on revisions to the shoreline setback law — and his “no history” approach to setting shorelines. Though that approach has since been thrown out by the Hawaii Supreme Court, Brescia has incorporated a large swath of public beach into his lot and landscaping, and we'll never get it back.”
ReplyDeleteJoan, I have to disagree with your characterization here. Just because it is sand doesn’t mean that it is public property. May I remind you that (I paraphrase) the public property extends only up to the highest wash of the waves during normal vs. storm wash. So a pirate property owner exercises his legal right to exclude, then it can hard be labeled stealing. He didn’t have to “incorporate” it into his lot because it always was in his lot. This is the problem with allowing others to use your land is that some then decide that it is theirs and no longer yours. An attempt at an unconstitutional taking without compensation. This is the trouble with being nice and allowing others to cross your property. People often try to make it into a right vs. the privilege that it is. Sadly privileges are often abused and forgotten.
I agree that not all sand is public beach. However in this case I have several times seen with my own eyes the debris line left by the highest wash of the waves on his lawn.
ReplyDeleteAnd you can say with certainty and without prejudice that the debri was deposited there during the normal wash of the waves during normal surf vs. storm surf? Hmmm...
ReplyDeleteThe interpretation of law that was used to set the shoreline for the Brescia shoreline has been overturned by the Hawaii Supreme Court. When the lot was acquired from Stallone, the large trees were all cut down and copious salt tolerant vegetation was planted and years later the state approved the shoreline despite it being more than 15 feet more seaward of the lot that adjoins it.This was one of several lots to benefit from the interpretation of Chris Conger when he was the shoreline "specialist" from Seagrant working at the State. His interpretation was that because shoreline certification is only valid for 1 year, they need only look at the high wash of the waves for that year.In this case, there were photographs of the waves coming up high every year for 10 years, but Brescia was given the shoreline Chris could see on the ground at the time of his site visit.It basically allowed a landowner to pick and choose a low wave winter and(even summer site visits), to set a shoreline that does not reflect the normal high wash of the waves, diminishing the public beaches. As Chris and the state kept up the practice of delineating shorelines with their narrow interpretation of state law on other lots, citizens appealed the shoreline on another lot that had been owned by Brescia and subsequently sold, to the Supreme Court .The Supreme Court ruled against Chris and the state and clarified they were using an invalid interpretation of the law to set the shoreline. The theory Chris and the state used was that next year the shoreline will be where it is.
ReplyDeleteWith the Brescia house, you can see how problematic that is, as the house was built on the burials because the shoreline was delineated too far seaward. Now the house is far too close to the ocean because of the interpretation.
The lands below the high wash of the waves are public .They belong to you and me. He or anyone who buys it,does not get to privatize the beach. The shoreline was valid for 1 year only and the public beach and rights extend to the upper reach of the wash of the waves, not the lowest and certainly not the edge of salt tolerant vegetation.
A couple of points;
ReplyDelete1. The B House was downsized by 1/3. because of the amended shore line and potential burials.
2. It is by no stretch an "big ass house".
3 the waves washing debris onto the lawn were winter storm generated.
1. Was there, been there, done that. I like Joan's post, except for the Barca parts. The majority of people that fought Brescia are 2491 supporters. When will we stop linking everything to GMO's and start letting issues stand alone?
ReplyDelete2. The Brescia issue was protested, fought against, and some went to jail. Mostly all locals, and Hawaiians. It was the Hawaiians that fought the hardest and had the biggest stake in the Brescia issue, and put themselves on the line for it.
Joan and another longtime north shore transplant spent a lot of time cruising the area, and taking pics. That investigatory acts helped to bring light to the issue and credibility to the violation claims.
3. Sometimes working together, with a double prong approach works, rather then conquering and dividing.
Lasker is just the typical landed immigrant mainland guy with that whole "I am here now, you can all relax" attitude. He's a lot like the last few hurricanes. Don't sweat him. Just enjoy his entertaining posts.
9:32 -- It obviously wasn't downsized enough to avoid impacting burials and the public beach.
ReplyDeleteI have just posted photos showing the debris line on the Brescia property during normal winter surf conditions.
And remember storm means a named storm, like Ana. These photos were taken on just a regular big surf day.
10 am -- I'm glad you like the post. However, I didn't just spend time "cruising the area." I was covering the story for Honolulu Weekly and this blog, where the entire Brescia saga is recorded. I was the only person who covered the story in any depth, and I was the one who took it
When I saw the listing for Brescia's house, I could not believe it…actually i could and it almost makes you laugh from the pathetic way things like this continue to happen on Kaua'i. No respect for what was, what is, and what the future of the aina will be. Just a $5.5 million house for you... special new owner to come enjoy :)
ReplyDeleteOf course the home built on top of dozens and dozens of burials of women and children, that Brescia fought so hard to "just have a home for his family" is now FOR SALE, only four years later! The fact that this house is even built is sickening, let alone he is selling it already. But, of course thats what he was going to do…. How many nights did he even sleep there?????
I find it funny that what the lure of Kaua'i has is being lost for short term gains and everyone is so goggly eyed with their money goggles that they don't even notice it or care to think of the future. Except for their own altruistic reasons. Who protects Kaua'i?
How was this property not made in to a public trust. I am familiar with the logistics of Na'iwi O Naue but WHY, HOW is this still legal and allowed. It seems when something of this magnitude happens a person should not be able to build on such a property. A site so culturally significant and home to over 40 burials, to not get acquired for protection seems very backwards. This property is a culturally significant area and needs to be acquired by public trust. Protect it now before it is sold and resold again and again, as most of the other homes on that shoreline are!
Words don't work. Time for sticks and stones. But guaranteed you dig deep enough in your own yard under your own leaky septic you will find the dead. This is an old earth. Older than what many believe. But when you find bones and the community wants you not to build there, guess what, you should not build. Sickening. This has nothing to do with Gmo or geongineering, this is itself wrong. Corruption. All about the money.
ReplyDeleteDidn't mean the cruising comment in a bad way. Just that the Hawaiians should get the lions share of cred for fighting on the burial issue side. You deff get the cred for the pics and fighting on the rules side. Hawaiians fought on the heart, religious, ohana, indigenous side).
ReplyDeleteWhat I meant is that it was a joint effort, rather then one or the other is better, or division. it just somehow worked. But Kauilani deserves huge cred for getting this issue out in the press on KKCR and being relentless in her battle and fight to protect the iwi here.
Just saying that many people were involved in this effort. Because I was there and part of it, I feel I can say that. Not downgrading your part in it whatsoever you played a huge role, but so did others, that were later involved in the GMO issue heavily and supported the 2491 bill, and of those most were the Hawaiians fighting for the protection of the Iwi in the Brescia issue, and went to court, and sometimes jail and got fined for it.
The fact that Brescia has acted with impunity and the planning commission did nothing nor took it seriously until you, Joan put it on the blog, and the Ohana (meaning locals and Hawaiians) took a stand where they were willing to get arrested, and did get arrested to protect the iwi), is when anyone took the claims seriously.
Even then, people downgraded the Hawaiians stance, and felt the only credible stand was that taken on the violation side, on the planning violations that were shown by you, that you so awesomely did.
All I was trying to say, is, see how we all could work together on stuff before 2491. Let's do more of that, Huh? And Brescia can *f* himself!
Chris Conger followed the current law of the land, at the time. Supreme Court didn't rule against Conger, ruled against the states interpretation of the law.
ReplyDeleteI'm not looking for any credit. I was fulfilling my responsibilities as a journalist and my moral calling as a human being.
ReplyDeleteJoan - Please cite your reference for stating that storm surf must be from named storms. It's not that way un the law (HRS) so is it in the court's written decision?
ReplyDelete"All I was trying to say, is, see how we all could work together on stuff before 2491. Let's do more of that, Huh?"
ReplyDeleteWhat did you accomplish? The house is built, the precedent is set. Nobody ever followed up to change the law like Judge Watanabe suggested. It was all a big drama for nothing. Like 2491.
To 3:44 pm
ReplyDelete222-1
DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Amendment and Compilation of Chapter 13-222
Hawaii Administrative Rules
"Storm or tidal waves" means waves of unusual
magnitude which occurred on a specific date as part of a specific and identifiable hurricane storm or tsunami event, to exclude seasonal high surf.
.
HRS 205
"Shoreline" means the upper reaches of the wash of the waves, other than storm and
seismic waves, at high tide during the season of the year in which the highest wash of
the waves occurs, usually evidenced by the edge of vegetation growth, or the upper
limit of debris left by the wash of the waves. [L 1977, c 188, pt of §3; am L 1979, c 200,
§1; am L 1983, c 124, §7; am L 1986, c 258, §2; am L 1987, c 336, §7; am L 1988, c
352, §4; am L 1989, c 356, §4; am L 1990, c 126, §7; am L 1993, c 91, §2; am L 1995, c
104, §4; am L 1996, c 299, §3; am L 2001, c 169, §2; am L 2005, c 224, §3]
Chris was the shoreline locator, the first one brought in by Sea Grant to use "science". They used entirely new interpretations never before used under his "expertise". The sad part, the science he used was not based on law.
ReplyDeleteOr he just did what he was told to do. Either way,he bears a large responsibility for the shorelines being located too far seaward and in the Brescia case, it resulted in the burials being in the footprint of his house. They do not know how many are actually under the house.
The Supreme Court did so rule against Chris Conger! he came up with the. no history approach that was thrown out!
ReplyDeleteBrescia downsized his house to comply with a Supreme Court order when he lost the case North Shore Ohana brought to the Hawaii Supreme Court and he had to move the house back 30-40 feet.
ReplyDeleteit wasn't North Shore Ohana it was Protect Our Neighborhood Ohana (Caren Diamond and Barbara Robeson) and attorney Harold Bronstein
ReplyDeleteI find it funny that what the lure of Kaua'i has is being lost for short term gains and everyone is so goggly eyed with their money goggles that they don't even notice it or care to think of the future. Except for their own altruistic reasons. Who protects Kaua'i?
ReplyDeleteNot the real estate industry that carves up pieces of Kauai's soul to sell to the highest bidder.
Not the tourism industry that pimps Hawaiian culture to consumers who want a quickie fix of tropicana and a week of someone else scrubbing their toilets.
And not Kauai's politicians, whose heads are so far up the asses of both industries that they can't tell the smell of money from mokihana.
Thanks for the citation, Joan. I see that it is the State via its admin rules that is interpreting the law the way you characterized it and that the law itself is unchanged.
ReplyDeleteYou're welcome. And if you take the time to read the state Supreme Court decisions, which speak repeatedly to giving the public access to as much of the beach as possible, you'll understand the rules are a correct interpretation of the intent of the law.
ReplyDeleteThis was written by my 5 year old as she was perplexed how someone could do this.
ReplyDelete"That is really not good! And its really bad to built houses on someone else's grave. It is really not sweet to do that and I would not do that if I were you!! That is the badest thing I have ever heard!!! Please try not to do that next time".