Punatalk
Punatalk
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ | Donate
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Punaweb Forums
 Puna Community Development Plan (PCDP)
 the Future of Puna
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Next Page

Please note: All postings, business listings and advertisements are made available here, without charge, as a public service by Punaweb. No recommendations or endorsements of any specific posting, business listing or advertisement are made or implied by Punaweb.

Author Topic
Page: of 3

kalakoa
Motormouth

12429 Posts

Posted - 10/23/2014 :  06:33:01  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Puna keeps growing while the development paradigms remain unchanged, so the "solution" is presented as more roads and bigger highways to handle the increased traffic.

Eventually, this place will have all the congestion and gridlock that people moved here to escape.

Maybe, just maybe, we can set aside the various petty bickering and find some real long-term solutions?

pahoated
Punatic

3019 Posts

Posted - 11/30/2014 :  15:44:48  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Why don't you take up your issues with the PCDP? Or better yet, get appointed. Uncle Billy just appointed 3 more members to the PCDP and they were all approved by the county council. Kind of a hoot, didn't know PCDP still existed.

quote:
Comm. 490: NOMINATES MS. LEILA I. B. W. KEALOHA, MS. SUSAN L. OSBORNE,
AND MR. ELMER R. SOLIS TO THE PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PLAN ACTION COMMITTEE
From Mayor William P. Kenoi, dated October 28, 2013, submitting for Councilís
review and confirmation the above nominations.


"Mahalo nui Pele, 'ae noho ia moku 'aina" - kakahiaka oli

Edited by - pahoated on 11/30/2014 15:45:45
Go to Top of Page

kalakoa
Motormouth

12429 Posts

Posted - 12/01/2014 :  09:57:38  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Why don't you take up your issues with the PCDP?

The PCDP is basically irrelevant. Wasting the bandwidth to post on a forum is probably twice as effective as any non-stakeholder (meaning: not a large local landowner and/or wealthy developer) process participation.

The fun part is waiting to see where the next development "happens anyway".
Go to Top of Page

ironyak
Punatic

USA
3084 Posts

Posted - 12/01/2014 :  20:32:29  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
It has been mentioned elsewhere that the CDPs were needed by the state to secure federal funds, but that they are entirely ignorable by local auhorities such as county planning.

Rob, is this summary generally correct?

If so, what would be the goal of current or future PCDP efforts?
Go to Top of Page

Rob Tucker
Kama'aina

9836 Posts

Posted - 12/02/2014 :  08:05:21  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
It is generally correct. Those of us who participated in the PCDP were not told the county was merely required to gather community input and not required to rely on that community input. There were a lot of people who put a lot of effort into it. Ultimately the Puna CDP was compromised by council member J Yoshimoto, Billy Kenoi and Bill Walter of Shipman Ltd. Consistent with local history the largest landowner got to edit the final plan to his liking.

However,

As it stands the PCDP does have some minimal influence. It is a record of the community's intents for future growth and has had effect on Council. What future influence it may have will ultimately depend on the integrity of our Mayor's and councils and whether of not Puna's largest landowner approves or not.

Paternalism reigns in Hawaii.
Go to Top of Page

Seeb
Punatic

2017 Posts

Posted - 12/02/2014 :  08:13:21  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
If want to get something done you need 5 votes on the council. The rest is just wasting time and effort.
Go to Top of Page

Rob Tucker
Kama'aina

9836 Posts

Posted - 12/02/2014 :  08:25:20  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Well, we got the original PCDP passed by 5 votes of council. At a later date Yoshimoto gathered his five votes to make Shipman's amendments. Yoshimoto is lawyer and carries water for whomever pays the bill. Pretty much the same for Billy Kenoi.
Go to Top of Page

kalakoa
Motormouth

12429 Posts

Posted - 12/02/2014 :  08:40:55  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
CDPs ... are entirely ignorable by local auhorities such as county planning.

I believe the offical stance is that CDPs "have no legal merit" -- which determination was published in the HTH, and is probably searchable from the archives of these forums.

It is a record of the community's intents for future growth

Yes: the community decided that everything should be in "designated commercial centers", any of which are either one-road-in-or-out or in-the-path-of-lava, sometimes both.

the largest landowner got to edit the final plan to his liking

Economic factors are still involved, or there would be more strip malls by now. The fact that there's still empty commercial space suggests either a lackluster economy, or that the existing space is too expensive (eg, a truly small business can't afford additional rent and travel time).
Go to Top of Page

Rob Tucker
Kama'aina

9836 Posts

Posted - 12/02/2014 :  08:50:42  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
The Village Center focus was in response to the overwhelming desire of residents to keep Puna as rural as possible. One major way to accomplish that was to prevent strip mall commercial development of Hwy 130. To date this has been successful. All attempts to install commercial development, to date, directly on Hwy 130 have been thwarted.

The one road in and out is the reality of the situation. PMAR - an alternate route to Hilo- was endorsed by the PCDP but opposed by Shipman and the NIMBYs of HPP.... so guess what.... nothing has happened.

Kalakoa may think strip malls are great but the mass of Puna residents disagree.
Go to Top of Page

kalakoa
Motormouth

12429 Posts

Posted - 12/02/2014 :  09:21:36  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Kalakoa may think strip malls are great but the mass of Puna residents disagree.

Never said I liked strip malls, nor that any development necessarily had to be "on the highway".

keep Puna as rural as possible

Miles of bumper-to-bumper congestion during rush hour is hardly "rural".

prevent strip mall commercial development of Hwy 130

With a side effect of preventing any commercial development near a highway anywhere in Puna, unless the State decides to install a roundabout there.

Bigger problem: applying 18th century solutions to 19th century problems. What decade is it again?
Go to Top of Page

Rob Tucker
Kama'aina

9836 Posts

Posted - 12/02/2014 :  10:10:29  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
What makes you think the PCDP offered instant solutions?

It is a long term planning document which the planning department tends to ignore.
Go to Top of Page

kalakoa
Motormouth

12429 Posts

Posted - 12/02/2014 :  10:21:31  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
It is a long term planning document which the planning department tends to ignore.

Exactly -- and if ignored often/long enough, the long-term future never arrives.

Meanwhile, the development paradigm is rapidly becoming obsolete. Adding lane-miles of highway so that more people can make trips to town is a poor investment strategy for "the future", but it's pretty clear that the landowners and/or NIMBYs want to keep everything stuck in the past.

CDPs were needed by the state to secure federal funds

In other words, a checkbox requirement for funding eligibility, not an actual "planning document" -- when viewed in this light, the whole thing makes a little more sense.
Go to Top of Page

Seeb
Punatic

2017 Posts

Posted - 12/02/2014 :  10:30:54  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
How about do-able solutions
Mixed use zoning to make small business affordable
2 lane paved road railroad>19th>to wherever Shipman will let it cross

Edited by - Seeb on 12/02/2014 10:31:49
Go to Top of Page

Rob Tucker
Kama'aina

9836 Posts

Posted - 12/02/2014 :  10:32:02  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Kalakoa, That is generally correct except the long term future is inevitable.

Concerning the ability to plan for volcanic events: The volcano has been here forever and it will continue here forever. Man could consider abandoning any or all of the 2,000 volcano locations in or around the Pacific but that is not going to happen. There are simply too many of us.
Go to Top of Page

Rob Tucker
Kama'aina

9836 Posts

Posted - 12/02/2014 :  10:35:06  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Seeb

How about do-able solutions
Mixed use zoning to make small business affordable
2 lane paved road railroad>19th>to wherever Shipman will let it cross




Seeb,

Zoning is a big problem. Glad you quickly identified it. On the PCDP we used to joke that prior to the PCDP the plan for Puna consisted of three words: Drive To Hilo.

If you look at where the money is spent and the lack of intelligent planning for Puna those three words are still the effective plan.

The only thing I can see that the PCDP has accomplished is to slow down the rush to turn Puna into a Hawaiian San Fernando Vally.
Go to Top of Page

kalakoa
Motormouth

12429 Posts

Posted - 12/02/2014 :  10:38:23  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
The volcano has been here forever and it will continue here forever.

Most of the C-zoned land in Puna is right in the path of the lava flow. Good plan?

prior to the PCDP the plan for Puna consisted of three words: Drive To Hilo

After the PCDP, everyone would rather drive to Hilo because it "preserves" their "country lifestyle choice". Again: good plan?
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Punatalk © 2003 to 2014 Punaweb Go To Top Of Page
Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.06