+- Punaweb Forum (http://punaweb.org/forum)
+-- Forum: Punaweb Forums (http://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Punatalk (http://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: New, Improved Pohoiki? (/showthread.php?tid=20227)
RE: New, Improved Pohoiki? - Chunkster - 11-11-2018
"But what about the people who still live in lower Puna?"
Not that we didn't already know it, but haven't the events of the last six months amply demonstrated that the county doesn't give a damn?
RE: New, Improved Pohoiki? - glinda - 11-11-2018
But what about the people who still live in lower Puna?
I suspect they need to realize they live in an active volcanic landscape and adjust to that fact.
Instead of expecting less volcanic activity I think we need to realize it is likely Lower Puna will get more. Because people/government didn't confront that reality before does not mean they should not confront it now. It is an active volcano. Why should government spend one dime more than a bare minimum on infrastructure that will be wiped out soon anyways?
It is a harsh statement I know. But look at a map, read what geologists say, look at the stats. Everything points to more eruptions covering more ground. Not less.
I believe government failed the community when they allowed for all these subdivisions to be built in the first place...
Royal Gardens... wiped out.
Kalapana Gardens.. wiped out.
Kalapana and Kaimu.. wiped out.
Leilani Estates.. wiped out.
Lanipuna Gardens.. wiped out.
Kapoho Beach Lots.. wiped out.
Vacationland... wiped out.
And now it needs to made clear. Crystal clear. Other than the bare minimum we are not going to spend money on infrastructure that will be covered in lava.
Is there any reason to think that the volcano is pau? Any reason to expect all this eruptive activity is over? Any reason to expect further development is OK, a safe bet, a reasonable way to spend our resources? A reasonable way to encourage people to live? To spend millions of dollars on roads? On schools or any other civil infrastructure?
I think Harry is wrong asking the state for money. I think the state would be foolish in giving Harry any money. If the people of Puna want to live in such high risk areas maybe there should be a pool, a collection of money, to cope with the eventual needs of further eruptions. But asking for the state to underwrite volcanic disasters? Why should they? Why, when from their perspective people are foolish to live in such high risk areas to begin with?
Ok.. they screwed up and allowed for those subdivisions in the first place. And people, closing their eyes to the fact it is an active volcano moved in. But look at that list.. look at how much has already been inundated. At some point these facts have to add up to a recognition that further development along the LERZ is untenable.
You want a beach? Go to one.. there aren't any here anymore. It's an active volcano for god's sake!
RE: New, Improved Pohoiki? - HereOnThePrimalEdge - 11-11-2018
It's an active volcano for god's sake!
Yes!
As long as we're making a list of currently unaffected areas in the vicinity of places previously impacted by an active volcano, why limit it to lower Puna?
Didn't Halemaumau start collapsing far beyond it's previous borders? What's to stop it? No more infrastructure for Volcano, if we're acting cautiously and wisely.
Then there's Mauna Loa. I won't list all of the recent lava flows, but maybe we should stop building in areas near those flows, following the logic that they're on an active volcano. Not just HOVE, but Kona, and Hilo.
Want to go to a beach? I hear Maui is nice.
"The great mystery is that such a state may be one of utter happiness, as it provides opinions concerning things, but no knowledge of the things themselves.” - Marguerite Young
RE: New, Improved Pohoiki? - glinda - 11-11-2018
You are so right HOTPE. And I hope you will join those that have contacted their county and state reps to encourage them to pass legislation that represents those facts. That prepares us to face those eventualities. Rather than blindly going forward without acknowledging our active volcanoes.
RE: New, Improved Pohoiki? - Tink - 11-11-2018
How many hoops do they have to jump through when the sand builds up in Honolulu Harbor, or the entry to Pearl Harbor? Pohoiki boat ramp was inundated with sand from a natural disaster, so a maintenence/restoration of dredging a boat channel and tossing it onto the new beach and grade it out would seem pretty simple.
Community begins with Aloha
RE: New, Improved Pohoiki? - HereOnThePrimalEdge - 11-11-2018
You are so right HOTPE.
When I first moved to Hawaii I watched a local PBS documentary. In it, they discussed immigration past and (then) present. A wise Hawaiian kapuna chuckled and said “every haole that moves here wants to be the last one. Shut the door! Stop construction! Pau!
RE: New, Improved Pohoiki? - glinda - 11-11-2018
Folks should not think I am against living in the LERZ. I just don't think we should put any real resources that way collectively when we can't get gov to put in good infrastructure elsewhere. I certainly hope all those that have homes and farms there already regain access and are supported in their continued desire to live there. I think the area is great. I think living in an active area is awesome. There was a time when all I wanted in life was to look out my window and see Puu Oo.. I get it.
But subdivisions? State roads? Schools. or other development? There is no need, and any investment in that direction is a fool's errand if it will be inundated in short order anyways.
I also agree with HOTPE, we need to apply the same cautious approach to South Kona and the area that would be inundated in short order by Mauna Loa. And Yes, Hilo is in her sites. But admittedly we are dealing with degrees. Kilauea's ERZ is slated for completely being covered in very short order. Whereas Hilo is a bit further outside the bull's eye. But HOVE is insanity. Absolute insanity when you look at the geology.
Overall the problem is we do not have any state agency that represents our geology. Other states so endowed have their own state departments that stand ready to deal with increases in activity. Further they are there as a resource to help other state agencies understand the issues involved and prepare for them. Here the state and the county do not allocate any resources in that way but rather defer to the feds. But when the feds issued the lava zone map and spelled out the dangers the state and county never codified those definitions into our planning, into our zoning. As such our government is derelict in its preparedness to deal with the eventualities we face.
Instead developers push their agenda. Short term money gains push decisions that should be made by long term considerations.. and the people get shafted when the lava flows.
RE: New, Improved Pohoiki? - MarkD - 11-11-2018
Glinda: "But subdivisions? State roads? Schools. or other development? There is no need, and any investment in that direction is a fool's errand if it will be inundated in short order anyways."
- - - -
You make some compelling arguments. But should we be viewing lava flows as not that much different to fires, severe flooding and tornados on the mainland?
All three of those are recurring also and can completely raze homes to the ground. Look at the intensity of California's fires. Their losses this past 6 months are far greater than what we experienced from our lava flows, and that's not even considering their death toll.
Trees and brush will grow back and burned zones will be a fire hazard once again in 50-80 years.
Lava flows, of course, take out all roads too. It is an interesting discussion topic. Perhaps there is a balance point of people being allowed to build in Zone 1 at their own expense. Obviously schools and government infrastructure should never be built in high risk lava zones.
How expensive it is to bulldoze rough roads out into lava fields? People can live out there with their portable cabins if they wish. Worth discussing?
RE: New, Improved Pohoiki? - kalakoa - 11-11-2018
don't think we should put any real resources that way
What we need is a cost/benefit analysis: cost of rebuilding roads etc vs cost of buying everyone out vs potential future property tax revenue.
a balance point of people being allowed to build in Zone 1 at their own expense
Any "permanent" use (residential or commercial) incurs overhead for the permit-license-fee-inspection regime that County insists on.
RE: New, Improved Pohoiki? - kimo wires - 11-12-2018
https://www.hawaiitribune-herald.com/2018/11/10/hawaii-news/highway-137-emergency-route-completed-but-access-pending-because-of-safety-concerns/?fbclid=IwAR0K6tMoBXzRPSl-yfGfBchGtzyIOky55gaS1DLWs6JmnxSN3VS3ADMZfYk