+- 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: PMAR (/showthread.php?tid=17407)
PMAR - alaskyn66 - 07-07-2016
Pmar wont happen because there are too many thieves...according to Shipman.
http://www.bigislandvideonews.com/2016/07/07/video-puna-makai-alternate-route-stirs-politics/
...And the people bowed and prayed... to the neon God they made.
RE: PMAR - HereOnThePrimalEdge - 07-07-2016
too many thieves
... and he also says the PMAR is unnecessary. I guess that's true, if you live in north Puna, and don't have to sit in rush hour traffic twice a day.
In the meantime for those in south Puna, let us eat cake... instead?
“There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them.”
-Joseph Brodsky
RE: PMAR - kalakoa - 07-07-2016
don't have to sit in rush hour traffic twice a day
If you're wealthy enough, you don't have to commute to work when your employer tells you, no matter where you live or what kind of roads are available.
No malice, just out of touch with the reality suffered by the 99%, and no reason to care.
RE: PMAR - Rob Tucker - 07-07-2016
Shipman has long term plans for a large shopping center in Keaau. It is in their master plan. The last thing they want is for traffic to go anywhere but through Keaau. Shipman's only interest is Shipman. Everything else is fluff.
RE: PMAR - geochem - 07-07-2016
I'm afraid that I have to take a contrary view to all the moaning about the PMAR. I've seen this happen repeatedly - city folk move out to a non-urbanized agricultural area because they want to escape the urban congestion and to enjoy the "agricultural life-style" and then immediately begin demanding services that undercut the agricultural economy and opposing practices that are needed by it: the whining about pesticide used for papaya, similarly on Kauai for the seed corn; whining about burning sugar cane on Maui; etc. etc. Ag theft is a huge problem on this island - Ruderman's sanctimonious BS notwithstanding, with the PMAR will come increased theft of ag products and the state and county will do about that what they do about most other adverse events that affect the businesses in Hawaii, F-A. And once the ag industry is killed off, then the whiners will whine about all the land going to new developments....
The reality is that the Puna subdivisions should never have been permitted. The economic and social impacts of the inevitable lava flows that will cover that district increases with every home built and every new service that is installed there. More roads means more people and more services that will, ultimately, be impacted. Kilauea has provided a "warning shot across the bow" of every current and would-be homeowner in Puna - the next time, Puna residents may not be so lucky as to see only one home go up in flames...
RE: PMAR - HereOnThePrimalEdge - 07-07-2016
The reality is that the Puna subdivisions should never have been permitted.
...
And once the ag industry is killed off...
So would you suggest that HPP and the Pahoa area should have stayed in sugar cane? Would the sugar industry have somehow survived in Puna, even though it hasn't anywhere else in the islands?
“There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them.”
-Joseph Brodsky
RE: PMAR - shockwave rider - 07-07-2016
quote:
Originally posted by geochem
I've seen this happen repeatedly - city folk move out to a non-urbanized agricultural area because they want to escape the urban congestion and to enjoy the "agricultural life-style" and then immediately begin demanding services that undercut the agricultural economy and opposing practices that are needed by it: the whining about pesticide used for papaya, similarly on Kauai for the seed corn; whining about burning sugar cane on Maui; etc. etc.
You are making a huge assumption about why people move to Puna with this statement. Every working person I know (all those people commuting to Hilo daily to work) moved to Puna because they cannot afford to live in Hilo. The cheapest lots in Hilo are up in cold rainy Kaumana ad they start at $50,000. A termite ridden dump on a postage stamp lot costs $200,000, and a decent family home costs close to $300,000. I would say working people move to Puna in spite of the rural environment, not because of it. Retirees move to Puna for the rural lifestyle, working people move here because it is where they can afford to buy a house and raise their families on Big Island wages.
RE: PMAR - Rob Tucker - 07-07-2016
Geochem,
One thing you have not likely seen before is a district with over 80,000 building lots, created illegally just before statehood for the declared purpose of creating a "tax mine" where the county can collect property taxes and deliver no services. The fact that fifty years later people actually moved in does not change the nature of the fraud or diminish the responsibility of the county.
RE: PMAR - kalakoa - 07-07-2016
The reality is that the Puna subdivisions should never have been permitted.
I will gladly take the "buyout option" to trade for equivalent acreage in a planned development north of Hilo.
Also, we'll need more "base load" generators without PGV.
city folk move out to a non-urbanized agricultural area because they want to escape the urban congestion and to enjoy the "agricultural life-style" and then immediately begin demanding services
I'm familiar with the sad tired story, but let's be realistic: what kind of "agricultural life-style" can be "enjoyed" on a 7500sf lot, or even a full acre?
If all the "agricultural" subdivisions had been created with minimum 10-acre lots, we wouldn't have the problems that "density" brings... but back in the day, "certain people" fought even a minimum 5-acre requirement...
Put another way: if these "agricultural" subdivisions had been zoned "residential", all construction would have been required to pay their "system development fees" to create the necessary infrastructure as the land was developed.
Can we all please just stop pretending that Puna isn't a "bedroom community" and move on?
RE: PMAR - james weatherford - 07-07-2016
quote:
Originally posted by HereOnThePrimalEdge
would you suggest that HPP and the Pahoa area should have stayed in sugar cane? Would the sugar industry have somehow survived in Puna, even though it hasn't anywhere else in the islands?
Of course, HPP was never in sugar.
The land surrounding Pahoa was planted to sugar, which was totally unsustainable.