������Ƶ

Honolulu Mayor Peter Carlisle is advancing a recommendation to tear down the long-closed Waikiki Natatorium war memorial, following advice of a task force formed by his predecessor, Mufi Hannemann.

“The City is in the process of developing an Environmental Impact Statement according to the recommended option of the Natatorium Task Force,” Carlisle wrote in an email to Civil Beat. “Once the draft EIS is completed, I would like to review it along with the public comments.”

Gov. Neil Abercrombie, who has supported restoring the memorial to its original functionality as a salt water swimming pool, made clear that the memorial needs attention without specifying his current position.

“Issues with the Natatorium have never been resolved and they need to be,” Abercrombie said via his spokeswoman. “I plan to pursue what the state’s responsibilities are.  The current condition of the Natatorium is disrespectful and hazardous. It needs to be resolved.”

Both Carlisle and Abercrombie have influence over what might happen: The city is responsible for the facility, but the state owns the land it sits on. City officials would have to obtain a slew of state permits to move forward with restoration or demolition.

While most people know the Natatorium by its iconic Beaux Arts arches, the swimming pool has been closed to the public since 1979. After a restoration in the late 1940s, it fell into disrepair. In 1965, the Honolulu City Council voted to tear it down. But nearly 50 years later, it is still standing.

Carlisle’s decision to advance Hannemann’s plan is the latest chapter in a debate that has raged for more than half a century over what to do about the dilapidated structure.

In September 2009, a city task force recommended tearing down the 83-year-old memorial to World War I. Based on an Army Corps of Engineers study that the city commissioned to explore post-demolition alternatives, the task force concluded that razing the structure and replacing it with a man-made beach would be the preferred option.

The Hannemann administration had said beach-creation (not including demolition) would cost about $15 million, about the same cost as stabilizing the structure. Officials estimated it would cost nearly $60 million to completely restore the structure.

Historic preservationists, led by the nonprofit Friends of the Natatorium, have protested the decision. The group has also challenged officials’ price estimates, saying restoration would be cheaper and demolition more expensive than the city projected.

But Friends of the Natatorium board member Jill Radke said she believes the completion of an environmental impact statement — even one that advances a recommendation to destroy the natatorium — is ultimately a step in the right direction.

“Once they do that, they should have all the facts to actually make a good decision,” Radke told Civil Beat. “My thought was that the facts did not support the decision (to demolish) that was made prior to that task force, and the task force was not given the complete information.”

One point that almost everyone in the debate agrees upon: Doing nothing is not a good idea.

“If it collapses we’re in bigger trouble than anything,” Radke said.

The Saga Continues

Over the decades, Honolulu mayors have taken varied positions on what to do about the natatorium. The public has been similarly divided. Many groups advocate for the memorial’s destruction, saying that Kaimana Beach would best serve the public if it were expanded. Preservationists point out that the beach formed after the natatorium was built, and would erode if it were removed unless significant ocean engineering took place.

Under the direction of former Mayor Jeremy Harris, a full restoration was under way less than a decade ago. On Hannemann’s first full day in office, he scrapped the multimillion-dollar plan, saying the money ought to be used for other city business.

While Carlisle has not taken a stand to save the memorial, it’s also appears that he has not made up his mind about demolition. On the campaign trail last summer, he told Civil Beat he was unsure about the best course of action for the memorial.

But city records show the Carlisle administration is moving forward with the demolition recommendation.

An status report transmitted to the City Council shows that “10 percent” of the “Waikiki War Memorial and Natatorium/ Waikiki Beach Shoreline Restoration” has been completed. The report reads: “Planning ongoing. Extensive field investigation of site conducted by consultant.”

Friends of the Natatorium board member Donna Ching — one of the few members of the task force who voted to restore the memorial — told Civil Beat she is hopeful about Carlisle’s support.

“I think Peter is committed to fairly and objectively looking at the stuff that I think the Hannemann administration had glossed over,” Ching said. “I think he clearly gets that restoration is something that makes sense. I have had several lengthy conversations with him as recently as a couple months ago. I think what he would tell you is ‘I would love it if somebody would take it off my hands.’ Clearly the city has no money to fix it, but we’re open to the idea of partnerships with private entities or federal grants.”

But Radke says that finding donors or other partners in the private sector is a challenge without explicit support from the Carlisle administration.

“It’s difficult to raise money when you’ve got its supposed caretaker saying, ‘We want to demolish it,'” Radke said. “A big hit from a fundraising standpoint was when the money was almost all allocated — the money was in the bank to complete it — and the city spent it elsewhere.”