COM 0281.005 2016-2018 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

264 LAND AND POWER.IN HAWAII 8 /Hawaii:Subdividing Lava Fields 265 miles northeastward to Kapoho, passing about a mile-and-a-half from the 1968),there was no discussion of hazard until sale began in late 1972 of Unit rear of the Royal Gardens subdivision. V of the subdivision as The US Geological Surrey in 1974 rated all areas of the Big Island for And in none of the Royal Gardens sales brochures on file with the Hawaii vulnerability to volcanic hazard.According to the USGS, Kilauea and its rift County Planning Department and the State Department of Commerce and zones "must be expected to erupt repeatedly in the future," and "all areas i . Consumer Affairs (DCCA) was there any mention of volcanic hazard. In downslope from volcanic vents should be considered vulnerable to eventual general these were the two government agencies most responsible for regu- burial by lava flows."22 From 1955 the east rift zone had been the source of lating development and sale of Royal Gardens and the two with which the most of the Big Island's volcanic activity.There were several major eruptions •. buying public would have had the most contact. within the zone,sending lava flows downslope toward the sea. In 1960 a lava There were other omissions as well in the Royal Gardens promotional flow covered much of Kapoho,destroying the village of that name.In 1977 an material: eruption nearly destroyed the village of Kalapana, about three miles north- . '' Lots in the subdivision were being sold with no water lines,no power,and east along the coast from Royal Gardens, and at one point it seemed as if no sewerage. Some roads were county standard, some were not. When the Royal Gardens itself might be covered with lava. Then, in 1983, 1984, and • Hawaii County Planning Commission in 1960 granted Royal Gardens pre- 1985,a total of seven lava flows entered Royal Gardens,destroying altogether liminary subdivision approval, this condition was imposed: "Subdivider 22 homes, or about one in three of all residences so far built in the subdivi- , shall notify buyers of land in this subdivision about the use of oil-treated sion.23 ' surface for roads [these were sub-standard roads that the County would Associated with volcanic activity was earthquake risk. Royal Gardens lay allow to be built but not permit to be turned over to the County for mainte- entirely within the Hilina Fault Zone, an area that the USGS said was espe- nance at public expense] and the present lack of water and sewer systems cially prone to surface ruptures because of land movement within the fault. and the lack of electrical power. All advertising shall call attention to the Here again there was a repetition of the pattern of large-scale speculative above-mentioned modification of standards and the lack of facilities."27 subdivision on the mainland,where often it was natural hazards that made Although public offering statements in general noted these deficiencies, subdivision areas wastelands from an economic standpoint. When the au- no advertisement for Royal Gardens on file with the Big Island Planning thors of a multi-volume national study of rural speculative subdivisions like Department or DCCA pointed them out. those on the Big Island selected 10 mainland projects as case studies, they Royal Gardens was not alone in such matters.More than once during the found that seven out of the 10"subdivided and allowed building on highly bpom years, Big Island subdivisions which advertised nationwide were hazardous land—near an earthquake fault,within the 100-year floodplain, . banned for sale in California,either because they were not registered there and on very steep slopes."29 This was true for the Big Island.Not just Royal as required by California state law or because their sales brochures were Gardens but a majority of the Big Island's speculative subdivision lots—as found to be deceptive, suggesting that the developments had government- many as 60%—lay within USGS"high risk"or"highest risk"zones 25 standard roads and other improvements when in fact they did not." Beginning in 1971 the US Department of Housing and Urban Develop- Yet the Big Island subdivisions kept on advertising and kept on selling ment refused to insure residential mortgages in the east rift zone and down- without county-standard roads, water, or utilities, or even easy access to slope from it, and in most areas at risk from eruptions of Mauna Loa flow- beaches. Though the Royal Gardens brochures talked about being "only ing south and west—meaning that 60% of speculative subdivision lots on walking distance away from lovely beach and shore areas,"29 in fact the aver- the Big Island were excluded from coverage. • age Royal Gardens lot was one or two miles from the sea,•usually along hot, dusty roads,and a six-mile drive from the nearest sand beach at Kalapana. A Bishop Museum study done in 1959,just as the Big Island subdivision * * * { boom was getting under way, described the coast nearest to Royal Gardens as a"shoreline of low, black, lava cliffs,battered continuously by windward Did lot buyers know what they were getting? waves...This coast bears witness to the great volcanic forces underlaying it Most of them really did not, at least at Royal Gardens,where at the time through numerous earthquake-opened fissures, and to the violence of tidal of purchase, according to a sample survey done for this book, some 72% waves through huge blocks of lava which have been ripped from the ocean believed their lot had fertile soil, and 69% did not know their lot was in a cliffs and hurled inland."3o zone of serious volcanic hazard. To those with some sophistication in real estate, the overall effect was In the developer's public offering statements(required by state law since strange, almost hallucinatory. As financial columnist Sylvia Porter wrote ti