How to Slow Growth

[marlin]

The fellow in Texas wrote: Where would it stop? Perhaps an additional tax on any houses with more than 1200sf? Maybe an additional $1000 tax for every tree removed from any property?

I notice that people take a scenario and spin it to 'what if's' and that doesn't move the conversation forward as much as "what about?"
Yes the government is in our lives way, way too much. They give us things we want, fire, roads, schools and in return they take something for themselves. Our taxes pay their salaries and everybody likes to pad their budgets. There is a big difference between living here and seeking to profit from here.
If a man fishes for himself and his family and maybe some to trade, he will have enough fish. If a man fishes for money alone, he will never have enough fish.
If we seek to maximize our profits from what we can wring out of the land, at the expense of our quality of life in the future, (and the quality of life for our children's childern) we have truly descended into madness.

I grew up in Houston and I am all to familiar with the attitude of the 'locals' and it is from that fine tradition that the values of our current President came.

Your ignorance is their power.
Marlin
PS I think educating people to the cutting down of their trees is valuble as trees are a resource that keep us all alive. Common sense, which is not so common these days, dictates what is appropriate thinning. I just knocked down a bunch of weed trees and have already replanted a number of others to take their place.



marlin

[bodysurf]

Would eliminating HPIA slow things down? Especially on the eastside of da big isle ? Everyone seems to hate the idea of the government "telling them what they can or can't do etc. in regards to their home so why should the gov't/taxpayers insure them?

[Bob Orts]

My comments that government can control growth are based upon zoning and development standards that exist. Nothing says government must always grant every variance sought for any reason or change zoning and development standards to accommodate every request. 30 years ago, the mass residential developments probably weren’t permitted by existing zoning. 20 years ago all the mega resort developments probably wasn't permitted by existing zoning. 10 years ago the constant subdividing of small agricultural lands to even smaller SFR development wasn’t an automatic right. Those lands became available for development (good and bad) because government made it happen by changing the zoning. Each time we see something we don't like as far as development, remember, it was the elected officials that in one way or another, made it happen.

If we are going to complain, don't blame the developer, don't blame the tourist, don't blame the business, don't blame the newcomer - they are doing what government says they can. The blame falls directly on those whose decision to say yes to a change could have also been a no. If you read through many of the current and past post, you'll see those same people who are demanding government stop this or that development because it's bad for the island, but at the same time is saying government shouldn't stop ME from doing it.

So to use a statement rbbyrd brought forward:
"It amazes me how so many people want government out of their lives yet are willing give government exceptional authority so long as it applies to the other person."

[bodysurf]

If the government is responsible for zoning land from say ag to residential...or especially in lava zones 1 or 2 allowing residential development ....does it mean the government also HAS TO supply home insurance so people can build there so easily? 'Hey...you like build one house on the rift zone that's cool....but get Loyd's of London to cover your home insurance then...'?

[Bob Orts]

quote:

---

Originally posted by bodysurf

If the government is responsible for zoning land from say ag to residential...or especially in lava zones 1 or 2 allowing residential development ....does it mean the government also HAS TO supply home insurance so people can build there so easily?

---

No. Zoning is the County's way of establishing development standards. It does not mean we throw common sense out the window or expect government to fill in the gaps in our judgment. We all have free will. To build or not to build. Slab or post & pier. Below our financial capabilities or above our financial capabilities. Likewise we should all be exercising similar decision making processes on safety, security, and longevity. Those are our decisions, not government. Just because zonings says something can be built doesn’t mean we should automatically build. Avalanches are a fact of life in Colorado, building against a steep slope you take on that risk. Earthquakes are a fact of life in California, building on a fault you take on risk. Hawaii is an active volcano, the threat of lave inundation isn't being hidden, covered up, downplayed, or being brushed aside, so we take on that risk. Truth is, government didn't force us to buy and build in an active lava zone, they just said you can if YOU want too.

To my point,
I read that a developer was going to be seeking a zoning change (in Kona) from agricultural to one that favors denser single family residential. That's the type of growth control fully within the hands of our elected officials. The land is now agricultural which does not permit the type of residential density the developer wants. They have to ask for the change, but are not automatically entitled to it. Hawaii County elected officials can say no. If the concern is growth control, the county has the ability to slow that growth by not authorizing the zoning change.

Just like if a developer comes to the county and wants to rezone land to permit a resort, the elected officials can control tourism growth by denying the rezoning request. Nothing anywhere says they must grant the request. If government wants to see growth controls, limit the number of changes that gives developers the ability to cause growth.

Government holds the key to growth control. They have the tools. Will you demand they use it responsibly?

[bodysurf]

Free will seems to be assisted by the state's offering insurance to people that otherwise wouldn't be able to get it to build in high risk area . It's like the State saying...'Not only can you build on a volcano but we'll insure you too!' Makes the choice a bit easier to build on the rift zone I'd think. Really seems the government could slow growth in Puna by tinkering with HPIA some?
Zoning wise.. some developer's ,like on Kauai , have gotten creative and turned supposed ag land(old sugar land)residential even without being rezoned...people are supposed to derive their income from their lot but many just build a house and graze a horse in the back for appearances sake.

[Bob Orts]

quote:

---

Originally posted by bodysurf

Zoning wise.. some developer's ,like on Kauai , have gotten creative and turned supposed ag land(old sugar land)residential even without being rezoned...people are supposed to derive their income from their lot but many just build a house and graze a horse in the back for appearances sake.

---

And that is exactly the point Rob is trying to make in the “How to keep agriculture/farming viable in Hawaii?” post. Bad zoning is contributing to bad developments.

Let’s look at the problem facing many mainland communities. Once you had sprawling 1,000 acre ranches. They were income producing ranches and grazing land. One day, a developer comes along and convinced the community planning dept that if they could reduce the size from 1,000 acres to 100 acres, you can get 10 times the number of people ranching the land and make it affordable to the small rancher. So it was done. Of course 9 remained ranches and one turned into a private mega estate for their own private horses. Soon, another developer came along and said, if we can chop the 100 acres to 10 acres, you will have 10 times the number of ranches and it will be affordable to many more ranchers. So it was done. Of course, 6 remained working ranches and 4 became estates with no ranching except for their own private riding horses. Again, another developer came along and said, if we can chop the 10 acres to 1 acre, you will have 10 times the number of ranches and it will be affordable to many more ranchers. So it was done. Of course 3 remained ranches while 7 became private estates with no horses. But, again, another developer came along and said, if we can chop the 1 acre to 1/2 acres, you will have 2 times the number of homes capable of keeping horses and keep the rural ranch feel. So it was done. Of course nobody keep horses and it became just another housing development. As this spread, soon those without horses converted the rural ranch atmosphere into another suburbia forcing the remaining ranches to be so isolated, they ultimately sell out to a developer and move.

Let’s say Puna land is zoned one acre agricultural and everyone in the area farms their land, maintains the rural agricultural feel, and abides by the standards of self sufficiency as best they can, and adhere to responsible environmental methods. They are powerless to prevent a person from building a 5,000 sq foot glass and aluminum modern home with manicure lawns, gated entrance with security cameras, in ground pool, putting green, and illuminated tennis court. Because zoning has loopholes the size of the moon and no actual mandate to use the land according to the zoning intention, owners are free to build what they want for the purposes they want so long as they stay within the zoning.

This is the scenario Rob is seeing occurring in Puna. Although land is designated agricultural, there is no mandate that the land be used for agricultural purposes. Just like the ranch zoning (mentioned above) enables people to have horses, nothing said they must. So instead of a paddock, you have a tennis court. Instead of a tack room you have a cabana. Instead of horse trails, you have a putting green.

[gtill]

I remember when they ok'd ohana zoning, seemed like a good idea, till the developers on Oahu raped the benefit, now there are 4 families in what was a single family lot, making a mess out of a lot of neighborhoods!
Ever wonder why politicians spend 4 years of the resulting salary to get elected!

Gordon J Tilley

[Bob Orts]

quote:

---

Originally posted by gtill

I remember when they ok'd ohana zoning, seemed like a good idea, till the developers on Oahu raped the benefit, now there are 4 families in what was a single family lot, making a mess out of a lot of neighborhoods!

---

I often have people upset with me because they say I always have to play devil's advocate. I explain that it's not just my job to help them solve an issue or get something. It's also my job to make sure they understand that when they open a door, they may not have control over who's coming in. If they don't want to know, that's their business, but I don't want to hear them complain later when what they asked for yields more than they can handle. People tend to look at what something can do for them and often forget to look at what it may do for others.