Plans to overhaul a seawall to protect a Waimanalo property with ties to former President Barack Obama ran into public opposition on Friday, with the Oahu chapter of the Surfrider Foundation going so far as to advocate for the complete removal of the wall so that the beach could be restored.

Neighbors and community members also have banded together against the project, arguing for the need to protect the state’s disappearing beaches, which have been destroyed over the years by seawalls.

The property owners are asking the city to grant them an exemption from environmental laws so that they can expand the seawall that runs the length of about one-and-a-half football fields, hugging the property just down from Kaiona Beach Park.

But Doorae Shin, coordinator for the local Surfrider Foundation, told city officials during a public hearing on Friday that they would be violating their fiduciary duty under the Hawaii Constitution to preserve and protect public trust resources if they grant the exemption.

“If we are going to have beaches for our future generations, conventional practices of coastal armoring need to change and they need to change fairly quickly,” said Shin.

Shin said that if city officials didn’t require the seawall to be removed, which could result in the ocean swallowing about half the property, they could require the owners to invest in restoring some of the beach that has been lost.

About a dozen people testified, all in opposition to the seawall project, during the 90-minute meeting held by Honolulu’s Department of Planning and Permitting, which was conducted primarily online.

Marty Nesbitt, chair of the Obama Foundation and co-CEO of a Chicago-based private-equity firm, and his wife bought the sprawling estate in 2015. Sources told the Star-Advertiser and ProPublica earlier this year that the property is also being developed for Obama, though neither Obama’s personal office nor Nesbitt would directly answer questions about the property’s ownership. Nesbitt and Obama are close friends and their families regularly vacationed together in Hawaii during Obama’s presidency.

The owners bulldozed the estate last year and are well into construction of two new single-family homes, each nearly 7,500 square feet. Plans for the property also include another single-family home, two pools and a guard post, according to building permits.

As sea levels rise, the existing wall will be inadequate to protect the homes on the property, according to an environmental assessment commissioned by the owners. Not only is the ocean expected to undermine the wall’s foundation, but waves will overtop the wall, causing the property to flood.

Redevelopment of the property brought into sharp focus the loopholes in state and city laws that have allowed property owners to continue to develop properties along Hawaii’s shorelines even as scientists warn of the need to retreat from the coast as climate change causes oceans to rise at an accelerated rate.

At stake are Hawaii’s prized beaches, which already have suffered major losses over the years due to seawalls and other shoreline hardening. Scientists warn that up to 40% of Hawaii’s beaches could be lost by 2050 due to shoreline armoring.

The state implemented a “no tolerance” policy two decades ago forbidding the construction of new seawalls. Walls built decades ago, such as that fronting the Nesbitt’s property, were grandfathered in, however, with the idea that they eventually would fall into obsolescence and new development would follow modern-day laws relating to shoreline development.

The seawall fronting the Waimanalo property has been in place for nearly a century and is badly deteriorated. If city officials grant the owners what is called a “shoreline setback variance,” it likely will remain in place for decades to come.

Shin told city officials that granting the exemption would set a “dangerous precedent that would allow for redevelopment of all of these old seawalls across the island.”

The variance would allow the owners to embark on a $3.2 million project to shore up the wall, nearly doubling it in some sections so that the entire structure will stand between 9 and 11 feet tall. They also plan to build two more walls totaling 70 feet in length behind it.

Neighboring property owners have raised concerns that expansion of the seawall, which over the years has caused the beach fronting it to disappear, also will contribute to beach loss fronting their properties, while members of the local community worry that it will harm a historic turtle pond fronting the property where they are working to cultivate limu.

Mark Webb is among 18 of Nesbitt’s neighbors who are currently opposing the seawall project. He told city officials that unless the owners commit to helping restore the beach along the coastline, they will oppose the application. What such a project potentially could cost or entail is not yet clear.

Andy Bohlander, a coastal scientist for Sea Engineering and agent for the owners, told city officials that the seawall expansion would not cause any harm to the beach adjacent to it.

Scott Ezer, vice president of HHF Planners who is also an agent for the owners, declined to address the concerns expressed at the meeting.

“I think we will take the testimony that was presented, have an opportunity to go through it in a little bit more detail and then if necessary we will submit a written response back to the department in a quick manner,” he said.

The city’s Department of Planning and Permitting is still accepting written testimony on the application and has 45 days to make a final decision.