The Future of Waikiki
Price of Paradise · Hawaii Public Radio · aired 1998-07-26
Guests: Mel Kaneshige (Outrigger Hotels); Don Bremner (Waikiki Improvement Association)
Duration: 1:04:57

[0:00:02] Randall Roth: Aloha, this is Randy Roth, host of the Price of Paradise show. We're broadcast live Sunday mornings on KHPR and KKUA and then rebroadcast Sunday evenings beginning at 8 o'clock on KIFO. Everyone who works to bring this program to you is a volunteer. We do what we do because we enjoy it and also because we believe in the importance of lively and informed public dialogue. We believe the brightness of any community's future is directly related to the level of activity in its marketplace of ideas. Our sponsor is the Hawaii Community Foundation, an organization that encourages grassroot efforts to improve the quality of life in Hawaii and that administers charitable funds with efficiency and compassion.

[0:00:41] Randall Roth: Today's topic is the future of Waikiki. And I guess it's safe to say that uh it has a future, but from there it's um perhaps anybody's guest. Uh we're at a fork in the road, I suppose, in the sense that what we do today can very dramatically affect what Waikiki looks like in 20 years or 50 years. And I have some guests in the studio this morning who have different ideas as to just what we ought to be doing today in order to have as bright a future for Waikiki as is possible. Don Bremner is a city planner who is the chief executive officer of the Waikiki Improvement Association for 17 years.

[0:01:19] Randall Roth: Don has degrees from Dartmouth and Cornell. Mel Kaneshige also is a city planner. Currently, he's the chief operating officer of Outrigger Enterprises and also is vice chair of the Waikiki Improvement Association. He has degrees from Harvard and Penn. Don, uh you were the head of the Waikiki Improvement Association back in 1974 when people I'm sure were having conversations like this one, what lies ahead for Waikiki, and they ended up with some legislation. Uh could you tell us a little bit about what they did in 1990 or 1974?

[0:01:53] Don Bremner: Be happy to, Randy. Indeed, they were uh not only discussing it, but they were very critically concerned about it because there was a huge uh building boom that started in the early '60s and ran through the early '70s. Uh basically eventually uh what happened with legislation, uh it was aimed to uh stop the uncontrolled growth that was occurring there during that period, but also to over the years, to reduce the density level to which Waikiki had already gotten to at that time, so that Waikiki could become more comfortable in the future.

[0:02:30] Randall Roth: And is this what in your article in this morning's advertiser, you refer to as as the time capsule?

[0:02:36] Don Bremner: Uh the the provision to reduce density over the years was the time capsule that I referred to, yes.

[0:02:42] Randall Roth: So the idea I guess was that instead of going in and telling somebody in 1974 that they've got to tear down their building and put up something in its place with less density, fewer rooms, instead, the law basically said when it comes time to replace that, you're going to have to replace it with something that takes up less space and something that uh would involve less density.

[0:03:04] Don Bremner: Yeah, it was the attrition idea. And also we knew, of course, that some of the buildings built in the '60s and early '70s uh would take a while to to grow old and to amortize. Uh and the fair thing to do was when they were amortized, then to ask them to redevelop them at a lower density.

[0:03:27] Randall Roth: Now, in talking to you and reading your article in this morning's paper, I get the impression that you were quite pleased with that legislation in 1974 and equally displeased a little over a year ago when it was repealed. Tell us a little bit about that.

[0:03:41] Don Bremner: It was. Excuse me, yes. It it was benchmark legislation at the time because Waikiki, in terms of other areas in the world, was way ahead of everybody. They were the one uh world-class resort area that was actually addressing this kind of problem, not only addressing it but doing something very critical and meaningful about it. So it was indeed uh the other side of of benchmark uh when the City Council overturned the uh legislation in 1996 and I must say also that it wasn't only the city council.

[0:04:20] Don Bremner: Uh first of all, it wasn't all of the City Council, there was a split vote 6-3. Uh but it was legislation that was brought by the city administration at the urging of Outrigger hotels.

[0:04:31] Randall Roth: And so I understand it, basically what it did was to get rid of this this time capsule that would have brought down density and what we have now, I guess actually allows an increase in density.

[0:04:44] Don Bremner: Yeah, it it essentially dismantled that legislation that was in place for 20 years, but more than that, it reverted to the densities that were allowed in the building boom of the 1960s and 70s, and not only that, but it it then provided that those densities could be increased uh by 20%. And and we're talking a major levels here.

[0:05:05] Randall Roth: So what you called an effort to stop uncontrolled growth back in the 70s, I get the impression that you feel that we've kind of circled back and we're looking at the possibility of relatively uncontrolled growth.

[0:05:17] Don Bremner: Uh uh not yes uh uncontrolled in the sense that it will vault uh population density and activity density in Waikiki up to the levels where certainly it's not a relaxed resort area and up to the levels that are the highest in the world.

[0:05:35] Randall Roth: Uh Mel Kaneshige, you are with Outrigger, um a city planner like uh like Don. What's what's your take on the City Council's action in December of 1996 getting rid of these restrictions? Good thing, bad thing? Tell us a little bit about your thoughts.

[0:05:54] Mel Kaneshige: Actually it's a wrong characterization of what the City Council did in 1996. It didn't get rid of the WSD, all it did was to say that for one particular area, nonconformities in particular, that owners could go ahead and rebuild what they had already. So it's not it's not adding any density. It's just allowing owners to rebuild.

[0:06:17] Randall Roth: So you you have to stay at the density that you're at now, you can't add rooms, you can't do something that's going to increase the density.

[0:06:23] Mel Kaneshige: Yeah, what you'd have to do is go back and um you know there were a number of statements that were made, I think in order to understand the entirety, let me just go back and I and uh hopefully this will come out more as a conversation. The vision of the WSD back in 1976 really was to try to get Waikiki at 50% open space.

[0:06:42] Randall Roth: And WSD that's this so-called time capsule or or these restrictions on density and and space.

[0:06:48] Mel Kaneshige: Yeah, WSD stands for Waikiki Special District. It's just the name that's used for the Waikiki area and that's why we refer to it as WSD, but the vision as I said uh is to get Waikiki to 50% open space and that was the vision that Don as well as some others had back in the mid 70s. If you take a look at what Waikiki is today and what Waikiki was back in 1976, in order to get to that 50% open space, what you really need to do is to um destroy, demolish a large number of hotels as well as residences in the area.

[0:07:23] Mel Kaneshige: If you go back and count up the number of hotels and number of residences that are overdense or in the wrong place uh nonconformities then you have to take down and I have it right here. You have to take down about 41% of all the hotel rooms in Waikiki, and you got to take down about 52% of all the apartment units in Waikiki. That's the vision of the WSD, that's what the WSD was trying to accomplish.

[0:07:46] Randall Roth: So from the owner's point of view, I guess you have an incentive just to keep up what's there, even if it's getting old and deteriorating. Is is that the problem with the restrictions?

[0:07:56] Mel Kaneshige: That's exactly the problem with the restrictions. One, you had a Waikiki that was built up already. As Don said and recognized, in the '60s and '70s Waikiki was built up. The city itself has found that 89% of all of the structures in Waikiki were built before the WSD went out. And when you have a situation like that when you have already existing buildings and then you put an overlay on it that says, gee, anytime you want to do anything in Waikiki, you need to tear down, you're going to have a situation where owners are not going to do that.

[0:08:26] Randall Roth: [unintelligible — audio glitch]

[0:08:35] Mel Kaneshige: Well, they weren't working. I think what the council recognized was the reality that the owners faced. Owners were looking at properties that they had put up in the 60s and 70s. All of a sudden, they were getting older and needed to be renovated. What would what was an owner going to do? An owner had a couple of choices. One could tear down and rebuild. If it tore down and rebuilt, what it could do is put up something uh less with less floor area than they had. For commercial space, you'd have less commercial space.

[0:09:05] Mel Kaneshige: Given the cost of construction and the time that you would be out, for example, if you wanted to build anything, generally you're out 2 to 2 and a half years. That means you tear a building down, you have absolutely no business for two and a 2 2 and a half years. You have a lot of money that you're spending on architects, engineers, demolition companies, construction companies, and then you get back up again.

[0:09:24] Randall Roth: And you've got and you've got fewer rooms when you're And you got a lot fewer rooms, fewer, few uh less retail space as well.

[0:09:30] Mel Kaneshige: So that's the choice facing owners. And in fact, what happened over the over that 20 year period was not much happened. The city found that there were 22 permits issued uh and uh projects built in the 20 years. 22 projects in 20 years. That's not a lot for a vital urban resort like Waikiki.

[0:09:49] Randall Roth: Okay. Don, I'm curious as you're listening to Mel, what's your reaction?

[0:09:53] Don Bremner: Yeah, well, we've had this discussion before and of course it's uh we each distort in our own vernacular so to speak. But uh it was interesting that Mel referred to the provision of the WSD in 1976 that would have created 50% open space in Waikiki. [unintelligible — audio glitch] And indeed, if anybody as I pointed out in the article today, if anybody wants to see uh what that actually meant in terms of physical reality, uh they can go any day today and look at Liliuokalani Gardens, which is on Ala Wai Boulevard, which has 60% open space. And was developed under the WSD, and there were several other projects.

[0:10:43] Don Bremner: Also, and I think that uh when we're talking about uh what is appropriate for building owners, we have to remember that these buildings that we are talking about that we wanted to reduce in size uh when they were redeveloped are all amortized when the owner decides they they can be torn down. In other words, they've had their economic life, and it's not uh too much to ask somebody uh for the benefit of themselves, for the future, and the community in general, uh to build a new uh uh economic entity that will have its own life even though it might be smaller.

[0:11:22] Mel Kaneshige: Well, a couple of things, one, Don continues to cite Liliuokalani Gardens. We checked with the city and the city said that the Liliuokalani Gardens in fact needed some variances in order to be built. So that example itself shows that even that project that Don points to as a bellwether under the WSD couldn't have been built or was not built in fact in conformance with the WSD. The WSD is so strict that you needed to have a variance to build it. That's and you know, that's one uh that's one project.

[0:11:52] Mel Kaneshige: If you look at other projects in Waikiki uh that we can point to that were built, you know, probably the best example is the Holikolani Hotel. Beautiful hotel, nice grounds, it too needed variances in order to be built. There's no parking at the Holikolani. I think most of us have been have been to the Holikolani at least to eat, if not to stay, and you'll notice that when you park your car, you don't park at the Holikolani, you park across the street. Under the WSD, you need to have parking connected to the hotel. It's not connected, it's off-site. And it needed a variance in order to be able to do that.

[0:12:23] Mel Kaneshige: That's the that's the difference. That's that's one. The other thing was Don's comment regarding amortization. That's clearly the case that all property owners face is that economically, it needs to decide all owners need to decide what to do with properties. And owners over the years have faced that problem and have said what we're going to do is try and patch and fill and repair our buildings as best we can because, economically, that's the best decision. You can see what happened over the last 20 years. That's exactly what happened. You don't find owners tearing buildings down very often in Waikiki in order to put up new buildings because economically they're finding that it's not possible.

[0:13:03] Mel Kaneshige: When you have that decision, individual decisions multiplied over Waikiki, what you're finding is a Waikiki that's going getting old and dilapidated. That's the real problem in Waikiki. You're finding a Waikiki that's getting older and older. When Waikiki gets older and older, you're finding people going elsewhere. That's the real problem in Waikiki. It's not overbuilding. Let me just make one more point, Randy. It's it's not the overbuilding. I think what we have to do is step back and remember this. Between 1976 and say maybe 1990, tourism in Hawaii boomed, literally boomed. We went from about 2 million visitors to about 7 million visitors over that period of time.

[0:13:40] Mel Kaneshige: During that period of time, Waikiki was already built up. The city found that 89% of the buildings in Waikiki predated the WSD in 1976. So already Waikiki was built up. And yet, visitors kept coming and coming. So it wasn't the fact that Waikiki was, as Don put it, overbuilt, that kept them from coming. They came, they like it. In fact, they came more and more. That's not the problem. The problem we're facing now in Waikiki is the fact that what we have in Waikiki is getting older. People don't like it anymore. There's nothing new to do.

[0:14:10] Mel Kaneshige: You know, there's an article in this morning's paper talking about people coming in and they're saying, gee, we're repeat visitors, been here, but you know what? We've seen everything. There's nothing new in Waikiki. That's what we need to do is renew Waikiki. We need to make we need to make it a place where people want to come back because there are things that they haven't seen yet. You know, that's one of the beauties about Las Vegas. Las Vegas, people keep going there because there's something new to do. The theme parks like Disneyland, they do the same thing all the time. You go to Disneyland every year and guess what, there's something different to do.

[0:14:39] Mel Kaneshige: But that's the key to having a vibrant resort. We need to be able to do that.

[0:14:43] Randall Roth: And the so-called WSD, these these restrictions that were eliminated a couple years ago, uh they were straight jacket, they were preventing this renewal in in your opinion. And so, now you're freed up to do the kind of renewal that you're describing.

[0:14:57] Mel Kaneshige: Well, not quite. Certainly it was a straight jacket because what it did was it put these it put essentially a straight jacket on what it what could be built. Very laudable goals in terms of what it wanted for Waikiki, but when you translate it into reality and you get down to the individual economic decisions that are being made by property owners, property owners said, hey, this is not going to work for us. We're not going to tear our buildings down and put up uh less space, we're just not going to do that.

[0:15:22] Don Bremner: Yeah, but unfortunately, it wasn't only the property owner's decision because we're talking about the future of Waikiki, which is a community asset and also an asset to the business people themselves. And and one other example of of what occurs when you don't do something like the WSD was after, is now happening in in other parts of the world. In Mallorca, uh sure, they waited for the private owner to make the decision, they never made it, and what happened, they suffered the consequences of getting overbuilt and the economy started to waver.

[0:15:56] Don Bremner: Uh that was very critical to them, so what did they do, they started on a program to go out and buy these private uh buildings that weren't being changed or torn down or anything and uh demolish them to provide the open space and reduce the density. I'm glad that Mel read the morning paper because uh very interestingly, in there for the first time coming from a Japanese visitor uh uh is the indication of what the real problem is even though the industry and Mel keeps denying it. The real problem is right there in his first statement. The Big Island is more relaxing, Waikiki is more like a city.

[0:16:36] Don Bremner: That's coming from a Japanese visitor, which is quite unusual. And I think however, it is one of the reasons why uh the mainland visitors in particular, who are perhaps more sensitive to this kind of thing are avoiding Waikiki today.

[0:16:51] Randall Roth: Okay. That's Don Bremner, a city planner who is CEO of the Waikiki Improvement Association for 17 years, and you also have been hearing Mel Kaneshige, who is a city planner, currently the Chief Operating Officer for Outrigger Hotels and Vice Chair of the Waikiki Improvement Association. You've been listening to the Price of Paradise Radio Show. If you tuned in late, our topic is the future of Waikiki. What do you think Waikiki should look like in 20 years or in 50 years and what, if anything, do we have to do differently today in order to uh realize that vision that you have for the future of Waikiki?

[0:17:27] Randall Roth: If you'd like to ask a question or make a comment, now's the time to call in. We've got a number of open lines, just call 955-8821 or if you're on a neighbor island, it's 1-800-955-8821. And if you did tune in late and you'd like to hear the show in its entirety tonight at 8 o'clock on KIFO, that's 1380 AM, you can hear the show, it'll be rebroadcast from 8:00 until 9:00 tonight. Again, our topic is the future of Waikiki and my guests are Don Bremner and Mel Kaneshige. Let's go first to Dodd from Honolulu. Good morning, Dodd.

[0:18:04] Dodd: Good morning. Um I'm listening with great interest. Uh I am the chairperson of the Hawaii Coalition against legalized gambling, and uh I'm struck by the fact that in the Price of Paradise, which you edited, uh a statement by Leroy Laney and David McClean said that casino gambling would be disastrous for Hawaii's MH and for the people. The market niche does rest on the unique Hawaiian culture and that casinos would represent um uh a distinct and perceptible conflict with that culture. I noticed uh in um the article this morning, there was no real reference to what happens to our culture, uh however we would define it.

[0:18:46] Dodd: Another statement that I'd like to make is when you're talking about bringing families in, uh that includes youth. And uh I'm not sure that after having watched the movie Las Vegas on last night's television that we would really want to have

[0:19:00] Speaker 1: And the statistics show that the regulation in Florida for example, they've done a lot of things where youth as young as 12 years of age have gotten into casinos. I don't think we want that. So how can we keep the question is, how can we keep Hawaii unique and and not have uh and not uh with with legalized gambling? Uh we are unique and I think that we should many of us believe and we have a very large coalition who believe that we should keep gambling out, let people go to Las Vegas. That's fine. They want the entertainment, great.

[0:19:31] Speaker 2: Okay. Let let me ask Mel kind of shame, because Mel in Don's article in this morning's paper, uh he suggested the possibility that somehow getting rid of the restrictions on density is tied into some sort of of plan to bring gambling or gaming as some people refer to it in the Waikiki. Outrigger, I think is sometimes thought of as being a proponent of of gambling, legalizing it. Um, what's your reaction to to that and what Don has said?

[0:20:04] Mel Kaneshige: Well, a couple of things. When I read Don's article this morning, I was amused. I thought perhaps I was back at the theater and watching the X-Files and seeing spooks and aliens coming out because uh certainly that's never been uh one of the issues that's come out regarding density is that density is being allowed because of gambling. Uh, gambling is Well, it is with me, yeah. Well, let me explain it to you. Gambling is illegal in Hawaii. It's a matter of uh public policy decisions made by the legislature. The legislature is spoken over a number of years that they do not want to have legalized gambling in Hawaii and that's just the case.

[0:20:40] Speaker 2: So, you you see that as a a separate issue, perhaps an important one, but totally separate in the sense that what Outrigger has done with respect to uh density and space restrictions in Waikiki is exactly what it would have done even if gambling had been uh made legal or if it was permanently illegal. That's just unrelated.

[0:21:01] Mel Kaneshige: Unrelated, totally unrelated. As I explained, the reason we needed to have some relief was because we had a lot of non-conforming buildings that were essentially getting old and owners were not going to do anything with the buildings because they don't want to lose the floor area. So they're going to patch and fill and make all of these little decisions as we went along.

[0:21:18] Speaker 2: Let me get a reaction from Don, and then we're going to return to to Don briefly and then move on.

[0:21:22] Don Bremner: Yeah, I'll tell you where that falls down, for instance. I don't know anybody that thinks that the Hilton Hawaiian Village is deteriorated. Uh, but in the uh action that the council passed, they have the ability to increase their floor area tremendously and they also have a lot of rooms. If they don't need the rooms, what do they need the density for? Uh, unfortunately, uh there is a provision in what the council did uh that allows somebody with a non-conforming building to increase their density. Mel is wrong about that. Uh, and gambling explains uh the otherwise unexplainable move in that direction.

[0:22:03] Speaker 2: So now Don is blaming Hilton for increasing density because they want gambling? I've never seen that. I've never heard why would you do it for Hilton? Why are we doing it for why are you saying Hilton I mean, Hilton is a competitor. Why would we do that? I mean, Don, I think you have to be responsible in your comments. And I think that's an irresponsible comment to say that Hilton wanted to have these density increases so they could build a casino. That's essentially what you're saying, Don. And that's absolutely false. I'm saying I'm saying that's what it affords them and you to do.

[0:22:38] Speaker 1: Interestingly enough, if you look at your column in the morning paper, you will find something referred to there as gaming in Waikiki's future.

[0:22:45] Don Bremner: Gaming is not in Waikiki's future. Look at the column. Why did you put it in there? Where is it, Don? It doesn't say that we're talking about game. The only reference No, I know the only reference the only reference to gaming in my article talks about Las Vegas where there's gaming, certainly not referring to Hawaii.

[0:23:01] Speaker 1: It simply simply describes what's different about Las Vegas. Don, you've got about 10 seconds to cap this because we've got a bunch of people waiting uh to chime in.

[0:23:09] Speaker 1: Oh, okay. Well, I'm also uh, I well, I think that the commission that is studying uh the National Commission that's studying uh legalized gambling and has both sides represented, including including the American Gaming Association and going all over the country, uh that report will be out in 99. And we don't know what those results are going to be, but the reason why it was was uh created in the first place is because there were so many states that were disgusted with what was happening uh on in other states. And we're very primed because they want to have more rooms and more gambling, and Hawaii doesn't legalize it including in the Constitution, too.

[0:23:45] Speaker 2: Okay. Don, thank you for your call. Let's go to John from Waikiki. Good morning, John.

[0:23:49] John: Uh yes, good morning. Uh I own a uh 40-year-old four-story building in Central Waikiki. The building is surrounded by six empty lots and unattractive three-story old buildings. What would be the consolidation rules and what can I do to improve the situation?

[0:24:15] Speaker 2: Um, I'm not sure this is the right forum to to deal with that specific of a question, but but Mel, can you kind of step back and and talk more broadly about property owners in Waikiki and and how they go about getting something done in terms of improving what they currently have.

[0:24:33] John: Main mainly tearing this thing down and rebuilding something that would be exciting and new. That's what I have in mind.

[0:25:12] Speaker 2: Is the city doing anything I guess my question is, is the city doing anything to encourage small owners into consolidating and making an improved, new, exciting enterprise? John, I appreciate your call. We we do have to move on.

[0:26:00] John: No, thank you. That did answer my question. Thank you.

[0:26:02] Speaker 2: We go to Lloyd from Waikiki. Good morning, Lloyd.

[0:26:05] Lloyd: Yes, aloha. Uh my question Well, first of all, Mr. Trump, who's a pretty big businessman who got the state to put a lot of money out, he recommended and said that would ruin the Waikiki, just for just as a comment. Secondly, the problem is that when they had the that first rule go through, they built all these gigantic apartment houses and developments before the rule got in and even put pile drivers in. So we've got a tremendous amount of density already because they get ahead of the of the rule. And now the worst thing I can see is all these places that were put up as apartments supposedly for people to live in as residents, have only hotels. So we've got not only hotels, but we've got apartment hotels. So we've got ourselves quite a density situation there because if you look at the situation now, I live in Waikiki. If you look at it today, you can't walk down the street. You're jumping. If you put another body in there, they're going to have to wedge themselves in and walk. You know. So,

[0:27:05] Speaker 2: Lloyd, Lloyd, stay on the line and I am going to come back to you, but but you've raised what for me is a as a different issue than what we've been talking about but a very important one and that is where does the resident fit into all of this? And I want to hear from both Mel and from Don, um how to what extent should the resident be taken into account? Is is it good to have residents in Waikiki or is that something that's on the way out that eventually it's going to be nothing but a center for tourism? Mel, I'll start with you.

[0:27:35] Mel Kaneshige: Well, we think that residents play a very key role, excuse me, very important role in Waikiki and we'd like to see that role continued. There are approximately 17,000 residents now in Waikiki. Generally speaking, the residential area is Malko of Kuhio and within the whole bron area. And certainly those areas are meant to continue. I think one important point to take a look at is as those buildings grow older, really, if the vision of Waikiki under the WSD is that 50% open space and less density within the residential areas, a density of of 1.5 FA, which means if you have a 10,000 square foot lot, you can build 15,000 square feet of floor area. If you take a look at the residential areas and you try to build toward that density, you'd have to take out at least half of the apartment units that are there now. And that's the vision of WSD, and we don't think that's right.

[0:28:26] Don Bremner: As Mel pointed out, the residential area is also already less dense than the hotel area and uh probably not much of as much of a problem as the hotel area, mostly because the apartment area is not the one that's attracting visitors or supposed to. The residents are very important to Waikiki from a number of standpoints. One, I kind of think they check and balance the situation uh so that the uh industry whenever it decides uh that it wants to go in one direction, uh has somebody to looking over their shoulder and saying, hey, we live here too. You got to worry about that. They're also part of the density concern. I mean uh when we approach the whole problem of what to do, there was a consensus and when I talk about we in in the 1970s, I'm talking about uh consensus of the industry itself, the property owners, uh the community and the government.

[0:38:00] Speaker 1: Yeah, I know the um I I think it's AT&T that sponsors the concerts in the zoo which my family has thoroughly enjoyed, and I assume that's the kind of activity that you're referring to in terms of attracting more than just tourists to uh activities in Waikiki.

[0:38:14] Don Bremner: Absolutely. I think uh we need to have those kinds of activities in Waikiki that bring people from all over the island, not only visitors but also residents back into Waikiki. And that's what makes it, you know, again a a vibrant place. We have to work not only on the the hardware, as I'll call it, the the physical part, but also the software, the people part. And if it's an exciting place for residents to go, you know it's going to be an exciting place for visitors as well.

[0:38:36] Don Bremner: Well, I would certainly hope that Mel then would join in doing something about the density of Waikiki because I think it's the cification of that area that has driven people out of it. Uh it got too busy, it got too humbug for people to go down there. I I think you're absolutely wrong. It would be nice for people to come back, but you have to attract them, and to attract them, you have to give them a wonderful environment.

[0:38:58] Don Bremner: You can give them a wonderful environment. You need to give them also uh uh attractions and things to go to. A lot of people visit New York City, a lot of people visit cities. Waikiki, I think you have to step back and realize is an is an urban resort, and it's a one of a kind urban resort in the world. People come to Waikiki because of that. People came to Waikiki between 1976 and 1990 in increasing numbers. Again, I said earlier that they increase from about 2 million to about 7 million. Why? Because there are a lot of things for them to do, a lot of things for them to see. They like Waikiki. The problems that we have in Waikiki now are not because of the buildings in Waikiki, it's because they're getting older and and not not a lot of things going on.

[0:39:38] Don Bremner: [unintelligible — audio glitch] Handwriting on the wall between 1976 and 1990, Don? No, in the last eight years, the mainland visitor count has steadily gone down. Somebody should be asking why. Have you looked at the visitor counts in the last year to year? Mainland visitor counts are up, Don. They're up. Yeah. Going to the neighbor islands. No, they're coming to Waikiki.

[0:40:38] Speaker 2: Okay. Well, in case you In case you tuned in late, this is Randy Roth and you're listening to the Price of Paradise Radio Show. The gentleman that you're listening to right now are Mel Kaneshige, who is a city planner and COO of Outrigger Hotels and is vice chair of the Waikiki Improvement Association, and also you're hearing Don Bremner who is a city planner and was the CEO of the Waikiki Improvement Association for 17 years. We've got a number of people who have been waiting patiently and we're going to get to them. If you'd like to get in line, uh we'll try to get to you as well. Our number is 955-8821 or from a neighbor island 1-800-955-8821. We're talking about the future of Waikiki and next up is Charles from Waikiki. Good morning, Charles.

[0:41:20] Charles: Good morning, gentlemen. How are you today? Just fine. Okay. Uh I live in Waikiki as well. I've been here for about three years. And I'm listening to the discussions going on. And one thing I think we have to decide is what kind of tourists do you want to attract to Waikiki? Uh to compare Waikiki to Las Vegas and Disney World, it's just not the same. Um the people been mentioning they've been going to other areas for um because it's too busy here. Well, those are the kind of tourists that go to those areas. So, I think we have to decide what kind of people we want to attract here. Uh why do people come here? Is it natural beauty versus entertainment and shopping? Um and there are certain one question I have though for the gentleman is, why do they feel that the government needs to get involved uh with improving Waikiki? Surely that should be up to the businesses to make improvements. Uh example, the Waikiki Aquarium. They're constantly updating their displays, they're adding new programs, they're bringing new people in. Uh why do uh why does the government have to get involved with this?

[0:42:13] Don Bremner: Charles, let me toss your question to to Don Bremner and and also elaborate on it just a a little bit. You know, Don when Charles was saying, you know, we need to decide and and talked about a number of key questions. Um what is government's role and and what is the role of the people and and who is it that should be making these decisions, who is it that is a practical matter will be making these decisions that will determine what the future of Waikiki is all about?

[0:42:42] Don Bremner: Well, Waikiki is particularly unique I think being in the state of Hawaii where uh it has long historical value in the culture and history. Uh it takes the form of a community asset, uh above and beyond the fact that it is a small conglomeration of private property, also. And the importance of Waikiki to the economy and the future of the state, uh also requires that the government and the people, so to speak, uh be involved in it. They cannot just leave it to a few property owners to decide. For instance, a few property owners in Waikiki uh will never uh uh be able to and shouldn't be asked to, for that matter, uh decide and worry about the impact of what they do there on others. It's for others to make sure that that doesn't happen.

[0:43:45] Don Bremner: Well I think before I get into that, let me let me speak to um a question that that the uh caller mentioned. I think we got to step back and look at what the big vision is in Waikiki. And I think that's what my article tried to point out this morning. Waikiki is an urban resort. Waikiki is a built-up area. Waikiki is not some of the areas we have on Maui or the Big Island. Those are completely different experiences. And I think once we recognize the reality of Waikiki, and we recognize the reality that Waikiki is not going to be torn down because that's economically impossible, then we begin to figure out what we should do with Waikiki in the future. If Waikiki is an urban resort and not a neighbor island resort, and it's distinctive in that way, how do we make Waikiki the best resort, urban resort possible? I think that's the question that we have to take a look at, and I think you have to take a look at everything that that we see in Waikiki with that in mind. How do we make Waikiki the best urban resort possible? Going back, what kind of tourists? Talking about Disneyland, Las Vegas, people now, travelers now can go anywhere. And if those are choices, certainly I'm not saying we should make Las Vegas or Disneyland out of Waikiki, but we ought to have experiences within Waikiki that would draw a large number of people. You can't be just one thing to everyone. You need to be able to attract a lot of different people by providing a lot of different activities for them to do.

[0:45:16] Speaker 1: Well, I I kind of disagree with that because if you look at an area like South Beach in Miami, they don't have uh amusement rides and casinos and things like that. Yet, it's one of the busiest areas in Florida. Why? Because they have a unique area, they're on the beach, they have a lot of cafes, outdoor restaurants, that's what brings people back, the that ability to socialize.

[0:45:37] Don Bremner: Exactly, and I think that's that's one of the things we'd like to do. One of the things that the WSD amendments did in 1996 was to encourage the outdoor cafes, encourage the use of those setback areas. Something that Don fought against. We think that in order to have that kind of atmosphere in Waikiki, that casual atmosphere, you need to have those kinds of experiences in Waikiki. One thing they have to address is the social aspects of what's going on down there with respect to uh hookers and pimps and homeless people and uh street gangs. You go down there after 11:00, you don't want to be down there with your family. Absolutely, we agree. How can you call the world-class resort when you have that kind of activity going on? That's the whole point. You can't. And the cification of Waikiki has produced those things. They have to be dealt with somehow.

[0:46:34] Speaker 1: We agree, and we think that it's something that needs to be addressed uh both by the city as well as by property owners. One of the things that the Waikiki Improvement Association is looking at now is the uh the establishment of something called the business improvement district, which has been used in many different areas across the country. Essentially, what would happen under that scenario would be the businesses would all chip in money, and that money would be used for maintenance as well as for security. If we had more people uh in Waikiki, trying to enforce the laws against prostitution, for example, I think we'd have a much better scenario there, much better environment than we have now.

[0:47:08] Speaker 2: Charles, I've got uh some people who have been waiting, I'm going to get to them. I appreciate your call this morning, though. Okay, thank you very much. We go to Sandra from Waikiki. Good morning, Sandra.

[0:47:17] Sandra: Hi everybody. Um I just want to make a comment. I'm visiting from the mainland. I've been living here for about a month in a condo in Waikiki, and um I can honestly say I have no desire to to come back to Waikiki again. I've been to Maui, I've been here, I'd go to another island. But if I had a choice, I kind of was limited in where I could stay on Oahu. If I had a choice, it would not be to come back and live in Waikiki. I just I just wanted to say that I was actually shocked at what Waikiki looks like and and while it is a city and it's nice because of the weather and the beach, it's really kind of sad. It was just really sad for me to see this. Um Okay. Sandra. I just wanted to give that opinion from a mainland from San Francisco. Okay, can we ask her where she is from on the mainland? San Francisco. Oh, thank you. I missed that. Sandra, thank you for your call. We're going to keep moving so that we can get to the folks who have been waiting patiently. Next is Ruth from Manoa. Good morning, Ruth.

[0:48:16] Ruth: Good morning. I just wanted to say that I appreciated that article so much and the program. I have a question about the uh uh capping of of the height of building. Um most people are talking about the set backs, but no one has addressed the height increase uh now available to uh hotel owners in Waikiki. And I think that we're eliminating the whole idea that people come to Waikiki partly to swim. It's a wonderful, beautiful ocean, and you know, despite the things that we've done to it. And when you swim out, you turn around, you look back, what do you see? The concrete wall. You know, Waikiki does not exist in a vacuum. People on boats look back, they see the concrete wall. People flying in to Hawaii look at the concrete wall. If you raise the height of the buildings in Waikiki, you will impact, I think that in a very, very detrimental way, and also make it unpleasant for the rest of the island, because you won't be able to see the ocean anymore or the mountains. It'll act as a block. Okay.

[0:49:26] Don Bremner: [unintelligible — audio glitch]

[0:57:00] Speaker 1: we talk about bringing in, restoring to Waikiki that we keep tearing down things even as we speak. And I think that development that can be with government help, but mainly by private people wanting to treasure some of the things that bring our long-time visitors back, when they come they don't see anything they're familiar with anymore. We need to have some things left from each of the decades during which Waikiki has developed. Now this building right now is one of the things that's of major concern because it looks as if it also is going to go along with everything else that was once nice.

[0:57:33] Speaker 2: Nancy, let me get a reaction from both of our guests. First, Mel, and Mel, I know you're a trustee of Historic Hawaii Foundation. So evidently, you have some some interest in in that aspect of it. What's your reaction to Nancy's comment?

[0:57:46] Mel Kaneshige: Oh, we totally agree with what Nancy is saying. Nancy's been a long-time supporter of historic preservation throughout the state. And one of the things that we think is essential in Waikiki is to preserve its uniqueness and certainly part of its uniqueness is to be able to preserve some of what represented Hawaii in the past. As you look back, the Moana Hotel is I guess probably the best example in Waikiki of what Hawaii once was. The Royal Hawaiian Hotel, certainly, is still there. There are neighborhoods still within certain areas in Waikiki that can be preserved, and if not, certainly such some of the buildings that represent the flavor of what was there before can be preserved.

[0:58:29] Mel Kaneshige: And I think it's very important for visitors to be able to have that experience of what Waikiki was throughout the many different times in its life.

[0:58:38] Don Bremner: Don Bremner? Well, Mel seems to talk a good game, but what's happening? Nancy is absolutely right. All these things are disappearing. Not only can't list, but look behind the old candles and watch for that big banyan tree to go that was at Hula's bar. Because there is already talk about putting that to the development shovel. And somebody just has to do something about it, not just talk about it.

[0:59:07] Speaker 2: Don, one of the points you made in your article was that in some other location they've addressed some of these types of problems by having the government buy property and then do what it wanted done with the property. Is that ultimately where this is headed, that if the people of Hawaii badly enough want to preserve the banyan tree and badly enough want less density, etc., are we going to signal to government to go ahead and and condemn properties, pay fair compensation to the owner, and then do with that property what, quote, "we the people" want done?

[0:59:38] Don Bremner: That's that's the lesson that history and the other parts of the world is is telling us about, I think, Randy. And that's the ultimate, that's what I say, I'm a planner so I want to prevent that from ever happening. We have the opportunity of prevention and an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure if we can avoid what you're talking about and what's happening in other parts of the world.

[1:00:03] Speaker 2: Okay. We've got just two and a half minutes to go. Nancy, you can have 15 seconds to kind of sum up. Oh, we lost Nancy. Well, we've got about two minutes one each concluding comments. Let's start with Mel Kanashige, the COO of Outrigger Hotels.

[1:00:18] Mel Kaneshige: As I said, I think we need to step back and take a look at what Waikiki is. Waikiki is the world's premier urban destination resort, and it is a built up area. It is different from the experiences you get on the neighbor islands. Once we recognize that, and once we recognize the reality that we cannot take the buildings down all at one time, that we want to have a better experience, then we can get to the question of how do we do that. I think one of the things we have to recognize is it's not the fact that Waikiki is built up that's driving people away.

[1:00:53] Mel Kaneshige: It's the fact that it's deteriorating that's driving people away. Between 1976 and 1990, what happened was Waikiki was booming and it was already built up. The fact that people are not coming now is because they have other choices and because Waikiki doesn't have the attractions that will bring them back. I think that's what we need to do. We need to make take a look at every component of what makes Waikiki special and work on it so that it's the best. We have the best accommodations, the best shopping, the best beaches, the best entertainment, the best hospitality, Aloha spirit, and obviously it's got to be uniquely Hawaiian.

[1:01:31] Mel Kaneshige: We can work on each and every aspect of Waikiki in order to make it the best place. I don't think we can bury our head in the sand and say, you know what we need to do is take down half of the buildings in Waikiki. It's not going to work. If government wants to do that, then it's got to pay just compensation. If that is the vision of government and the people, then fine, but then it's going to cost us a tremendous amount. That doesn't need to happen. Waikiki can develop on its own.

[1:01:57] Don Bremner: Okay. Don Bremner, city planner, former head of the Waikiki Improvement Association, you've got one minute. Yep. Well, I think that the it should be obvious to everybody that's been listening that the the visitors have spoken. We heard from a visitor from the Mainland in the newspaper, there's a visitor from Japan saying, "Waikiki is too much of a big city. I will not return." The statistics that Mel keeps forgetting about or or denying are that the Mainland visitors now are picking neighbor islands as their choice destinations.

[1:02:33] Don Bremner: The handwriting is on the wall that we've got to do something in relation to that handwriting, once and for all, not just keep denying it because that will surely put Waikiki down the shoot in the future, and that would be disastrous for everybody.

[1:02:50] Speaker 2: Okay, thank you. That's Don Bremner and earlier you heard from Mel Kanashige. The producer of the Price Paradise Radio show is Susie Roth. Our helpers this morning were Wally Roth and Tom Roth. The production chief is Jeff Olardi. He's also in charge of membership for public radio. Aloha.