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)
 Public comment sought on General Plan
 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 2

ironyak
Punatic

USA
3084 Posts

Posted - 02/10/2015 :  08:41:43  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
This means you kalakoa (and everyone else :)

Excerpt: More at link below

It’s the document that dictates what can be developed where.

It governs population density, urban design, infrastructure improvements, public access and preservation of natural resources and open spaces. The General Plan is the policy document for the long-range comprehensive development of Hawaii Island.

Last updated in February 2005, it was scheduled to have a new update completed by this month. That’s not going to happen.

Instead, a process that kicked off Friday will solicit public comments until June 6. Then the planning director has until April 2017 to review the public comments and prepare recommended amendments. Public workshops will be held that summer, and then public hearings until the plan is adopted by the County Council in February 2018.

Planning Director Duane Kanuha, addressing the County Council Planning Committee in April, said a combination of factors caused the plan amendment process to slip off the drawing board. First, the department, under the previous director Bobby Jean Leithead Todd, was busy creating Community Development Plans to allow more community input into the planning process. That pulled staff off the General Plan during the recessionary years when furloughs and position freezes led to staff shortages.

“Once you have the Community Development Plans adopted … then the General Plan becomes a linkage that keeps the Community Development Plans together,” Kanuha said at the time. “I don’t see there’s a need to integrate any policy plans.” Kanuha didn’t return calls Friday or Monday for additional comment.

The county currently has five CDPs — Kona, South Kohala, North Kohala, Puna and Downtown Hilo — and two more — Ka‘u and Hamakua — in the works. Hamakua Councilwoman Valerie Poindexter said she can accept the delay in the General Plan because the creation of CDPs has really helped the communities.

- See more at: http://hawaiitribune-herald.com/news/local-news/public-comment-sought-general-plan#sthash.cL08g465.dpuf

kalakoa
Motormouth

12429 Posts

Posted - 02/10/2015 :  09:40:36  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Not to have an "attitude problem" or anything, but the CDPs already clearly state what development will be allowed where. Reinforcing these with an overall General Plan may be necessary for the overall legislative structure, but it's unlikely that the GP will override any particular CDP requirement.

the creation of CDPs has really helped the communities.

I see the PCDP preventing development. Not sure how this is "really helping", but let's assume it is at least preventing "bad development". Further presume that preventing "bad" development opens the way for "good" development. Now show me one new business that has broken ground (eg, not moving into an existing commercial space) in Puna since the passage of the PCDP. (Partial credit for the Keaau HMSA building; it seems to be mostly a move/consolidation, not "new" like the proverbial Pahoa KTA.)

Speaking of which: I can hardly wait for the HMSA building to open -- it's fully compliant with all stipulations of the PCDP, so the surrounding area should suffer zero side effects, right? Because development plans are so awesome.
Go to Top of Page

rainyjim
Punatic

2079 Posts

Posted - 02/11/2015 :  00:01:38  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
If it's not to much to ask I've got three things off the top of my head: (haven't a clue if any of these things apply to whatever the government defines a GP as, I'm sure someone will enlighten me)

1. No more driveways onto highways, and remove existing driveways (idk how that'll happen but hey isn't that what we pay state/county people to figure out?)

2. Complementing #1 - Frontage roads.

I'm talking safety here.

3. Let's get our own branch of HDOT over here on the big island. It's clear the bozos on Oahu haven't a clue. I will say Oahu seems just as dysfunctional / Stupidly planned (or lack thereof) as the big island, so at least we aren't getting any special treatment ; )
Go to Top of Page

ironyak
Punatic

USA
3084 Posts

Posted - 02/11/2015 :  06:11:20  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Keeau Development Meeting tonight 2/11/2015 @ 5:30p to gather comments on designating hundreds of acres for Urban Expansion Area with mixed-use development.

http://punaweb.org/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=20597
Go to Top of Page

ironyak
Punatic

USA
3084 Posts

Posted - 02/12/2015 :  05:30:54  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by rainyjim
1. No more driveways onto highways, and remove existing driveways (idk how that'll happen but hey isn't that what we pay state/county people to figure out?)
2. Complementing #1 - Frontage roads.


While safety on the state and county highways is addressed, I don't believe the driveway onto highway issue is in GP or PCDP. Easiest way to improve safety is to reduce speeds, which has been done on 130 in areas with lots of egress including driveways. Another option might be to require extra shoulder space to allow for pulling off before slowing down to turn into a driveway. Worth commenting about on GP and PCDP methinks.

Having driven many a Sunday mile on frontage roads, I understand the appeal. IMHO, unlikely to happen here, unless you count PMAR (which is similar but also has been unlikely to implement)

3. Let's get our own branch of HDOT over here on the big island.
We have a branch although I've found it difficult to get a reponse from them many times. Given GP has no action items on health for Puna, plenty of room for suggestions (like read the PCDP section on health services to start)
http://health.hawaii.gov/big-island/
Go to Top of Page

kalakoa
Motormouth

12429 Posts

Posted - 02/12/2015 :  07:43:55  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
"No direct highway access" is spelled out in the PCDP as it pertains to "commercial center" development.

Highway access is also subject to permits from HDOT because it's a State highway.

Agree that HDOT has an "Oahu-centric" worldview; it's one of the reasons that Pearl Bakery gave up the fight -- Hilo HDOT said their driveway was just fine, Oahu HDOT had a list of changes that were unrealistic and unnecessary.
Go to Top of Page

pbmaise
Kamaaina

USA
939 Posts

Posted - 03/02/2015 :  01:13:59  Show Profile  Visit pbmaise's Homepage  Reply with Quote
It is the break neck speed of this plan that concerns me the most. Just updated in 2005 and implementation as soon as Feb 2018?

Here are the links to the plan. The document is almost 400 pages long. I encourage people to review and make public comments.

First comment should be why it takes 10 months to review public comment?

http://www.hawaiicountycdp.info/puna-cdp/draft-plan-recommendations

http://www.hawaiicountycdp.info/puna-cdp

Edited by - pbmaise on 03/02/2015 19:17:42
Go to Top of Page

Wao nahele kane
Punatic

USA
2494 Posts

Posted - 03/13/2015 :  10:32:53  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Anything in Puna within and South of the Basin to Volcanoes National Park.

I'm curious as to why the PCDP assumes heavy development and sprawl will occur throughout this region and it must be managed as proposed. I find that such concerns are valid in the majority of near urban zones about the United States but such consideration within the shadows of one of the most active volcanos in world approaches a certain disregard for reality.

I would add that the growth in this region of Puna is not accompanied by newly established subdivisions but rather an occupation of that which has already been designated. In this case, there has been little to no previously undesignated area sprawl. Nor will there be due to the presence of Kilauea's activity. This again is like no other circumstances experienced by other planning efforts in the USA.

I see the PCDP as a gallant effort and well thought out North of the Basin but within the basin and South of it there is a disconnect from it's dynamic nature and certain absence in foresight to these dynamics and the situations that will be encountered.

I'd like to see that which is addressed within the Basin and South of it "re-visited" with dynamic consideration applied. No designated park will prove itself of intended value when inundated by lava. I would like to see the permanence standards devolved into acceptance of mobility and other flexibilities accompanied by a broader range of necessary options. These dynamics should be inclusive of a wider range in ingress/egress options as well as dwelling and commercial building practices. Special zoning allowances can be applied to a region that is exposed to higher incidents of unique natural hazards and the PCDP should call for and apply these dynamic needs.
Go to Top of Page

Wao nahele kane
Punatic

USA
2494 Posts

Posted - 03/13/2015 :  11:33:13  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
As an example regarding an applied dynamic for this region, lets consider fueling stations and their current immobility. In the following link we see that fuel tanks can be made mobile for stationary application and actually provide additional benefits in being designed as such.
http://www.unitedconcrete.com/convault/head_convault.htm

This is something that should be outlined in the PCDP with regard to the allowed fueling station types in this region accompanied by a required designated backup location in case of primary location inundation. Dynamic planning.
Go to Top of Page

Wao nahele kane
Punatic

USA
2494 Posts

Posted - 03/13/2015 :  11:59:52  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Planning in the aforementioned method serves not only to reduce loss. It also serves to automatically fulfill public need in a time of crisis and affords the fueling station owner a substantial reduction in financial loss due to inundation or threat of inundation allowing them to continue business as usual after a substantially lower cost move assuming it even needs to move. The station owner is also afforded greater flexibility in their need to act as we saw in the case of the propane station near the Malama market location. This also reduces the added demands placed upon emergency services during such crisis by reducing demands upon logistic considerations.

There are many more like type things that should be in the PCDP.
Go to Top of Page

Wao nahele kane
Punatic

USA
2494 Posts

Posted - 03/13/2015 :  12:27:47  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Lets consider a worst case scenario within the realm of reasonable possibility.
Let's assume everything from just North of Pahoa down to just North the Beaches becomes inundated heavily and the region south is cut off.
Yes, there is the COCR connection in progress but the question arises - why not a small emergency services port? Large enough to handle barges during emergency and obviously for pleasure craft launching and while at it broad enough to launch fishing boats regularly? This scenario should be applied within the PCDP and a couple locations should be selected and noted for serious consideration. This should be an inland excavated port because the offshore drop is far too great to establish a piled rock jetty type port. Kapoho is an excellent strategic location because if it's inundated the surrounding areas aren't cut off by such a flow and still retain access to Hilo as usual.

Why isn't this in the PCDP proposal?

Go to Top of Page

Wao nahele kane
Punatic

USA
2494 Posts

Posted - 03/13/2015 :  12:56:02  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Along with a port should be a small airport one that can ALSO handle tourist helicopters. Then the tour birds can take up residence there and fly tourist a short distance to sight see the volcano and stay out of the skies above our populated neighborhoods. This not only provides for an air emergency services location it saves the tour birds added fuel cost and provides for a quieter Puna.

One possible location for tour birds could be just South of Malama market where they are clearing all that land back there (assuming the owner would lease or part with it for that use) next to the market. From there they can fly on up to Pu'u O'o and around it etc.

Why isn't this in the PCDP?

Edited by - Wao nahele kane on 03/13/2015 13:19:44
Go to Top of Page

kalakoa
Motormouth

12429 Posts

Posted - 03/13/2015 :  17:58:46  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
an occupation of that which has already been designated

The "problem" is not the subdivisions per se, but the need for services as those subdivisions approach 100% occupancy, and the existing land-use designations effectively leave nowhere for those services to be built.

If Puna is destined to remain a bedroom community forever, it will need many more lane-miles of road to Drive To Hilo For Everything.

If Puna is going to actually develop into a "real" place, it will need some appropriately zoned land, possibly with additional lane-miles of access road.

The "sprawl" has already happened. I often run errands in two or more parts of "Greater Keaau" (Transfer Station, New Commercial, Industrial Park, and Old Town), and each is effectively a separate trip up and down the highway -- almost as if they're isolated little downs, all developed independently.

Why isn't this (small heliport) in the PCDP?

Because Shipman doesn't own a tour helicopter company?
Go to Top of Page

Wao nahele kane
Punatic

USA
2494 Posts

Posted - 03/13/2015 :  18:10:23  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Kalakoa,
I agree.
Go to Top of Page

Wao nahele kane
Punatic

USA
2494 Posts

Posted - 03/13/2015 :  19:27:11  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
All we can do is hope that the latest lava threat and damage has taken a foothold into the minds of those creating plans for this area.
It's going to take some creative out of the box thinking to address this region properly. Simply ignoring the issue in hopes no-one will move here won't work and will only exacerbate future problems.
Simple things such as a full coastal route between Hilo and Kalapana places a main route furthest from the reach of Kilauea caldera activity while still upon its slopes. Inundation of the beach road occurring from an origin position Makai 130 upon the rift still leaves 130 as a full alternative route. Where flows that inundate 130 originating mauka 130 upon the rift still leave a coastal route as a viable alternate unless both are inundated at the same time which is probably least frequent a likelihood than all the other probabilities possible but why a port should be created just in case.

I read the PCDP and I see sections of the old beach road penned in as a hiking trail? I'm sorry but that line of thinking is simply ignoring this regions future needs and replacing them with dreams, dreams that WILL ultimately prove harmful to the future community should they be adopted. 130 will be inundated everywhere as will railroad and the beach road, but the likelihood of all three being inundated at the same time will occur far less frequently than just one or two being inundated at a time. The closer to the ocean down the rift a flow begins the less likely it is to cause a full cut off of the region when a coastal route compliments 130.

As per the zoning is concerned. Specialty zones could be assigned to almost all AG 3 and select areas of Ag 1 and select areas of smaller parcel zone areas within and South of the basin. These could allow for an XYZ service to be allowed without additional special zoning requirements if no other XYZ services are within x miles of the cited project. XYZ for example, a convenience grocer, dual pump gas station with approved above ground tanks (like a 7-11 with a double gas pump). Small restaurants could be allowed on the coast with a cap on capacity every x miles. Promoting small business to spring forth would be helpful. The current agricultural restriction shouldn't be applied to this region as it's far too much agriculture area and not enough with regard to local community public services. Jumping the hurdles to get special zoning for small convenience stores or an enclosed small restaurant, etc. isn't helping things. We need more local services as to stop relying so heavily on single location box type market areas that can be inundated at any time - leaving the region without any such services. Expanding zoning uses accompanied by simplifying building codes to bare minimum standards through the zoning regulations and adopting above ground fuel storage tanks etc. would help to make this area less susceptible to any single lava flow event that would otherwise cause major problems community wide. A great deal more flexibility is necessary in this region if the State and County don't want to lose many more millions in the future regarding lava flows.

This region will never represent a typical community and should not be restricted to the common standard model. It cannot be done as long as lava flows from Kilauea and expecting it to meld into a typical community mold is neither reasonable or intelligent.




Edited by - Wao nahele kane on 03/13/2015 19:30:38
Go to Top of Page

ironyak
Punatic

USA
3084 Posts

Posted - 03/14/2015 :  05:46:14  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Kane - you've clearly put a lot of time and thought into these posts. Unfortunately many of these good ideas are predicated on the notion that the county has any interest in providing services or supporting growth in Puna.

They have shown in a variety of subtle and not so subtle ways that they wish to continue the tax-mine principle that founded most of the Puna subdivisions. Lack of useful zoning and "Drive to Hilo" continues this policy by limiting growth in Puna and offsets any support cost for commuting to the State, which only improves the highway when forced.

Rob, do you have any articles, links, etc about the fuel tax lawsuit and the fed to state to county to PCDP process to free up those funds and supposedly direct the development process? I understand the broad strokes of what happened but would be interested in more of the details.

All this said, I've been intrigued by the actions of this Planning Commission as they appear to bucking the policy. Whether this is because some key members reside in Puna and actually care or if it's just some part in the larger interests by the county is unclear, but it doesn't appear to be business as usual IMO.
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 2 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