02-16-2012, 12:36 PM
Growing more employment opportunities and more services within Puna is a high priority of mine. From my observation of the PCDP, it is also a high priority there -- higher than PMAR.
Priorities are important. This is how government fiscal allocations work: once Puna gets some money for something (e.g., PMAR), then we will be told, "To the back of the line and wait your turn again" -- with allocation of funds to PMAR, there will be no money for infrastructure to support local business and services.
The "build out" discussion is useful in considering the maximum number of residents. However, it has limits. For example, we all know people who own one or more adjoining parcels -- Elizabeth and I own two adjoining parcels, and we know a number of other subdivision residents who do. So, each and every parcel is not necessarily destined to have a family on it.
Also, one suggestion that never got traction during early PCDP discussions was identifying parcels with high risk of lava inundation, subsidence along the coast, and other similar characteristics and changing their status so that building would not occur on them. These types of parcels exist in abundance in Puna and sell at the bottom of the market, or do not sell at all. So, while buying parcels for purposes of community safety and/or open space enhancement could be expensive, the cost of such parcels is a lot less than the "average" price in Puna. Not a panacea, but it could be part of the solution.
Finally, I firmly believe that a clear look at where the global economy is going in the coming decades shows a need to invest to reduce the transportation cost component of everything -- a highway between Puna and Hilo does the opposite.
Priorities are important. This is how government fiscal allocations work: once Puna gets some money for something (e.g., PMAR), then we will be told, "To the back of the line and wait your turn again" -- with allocation of funds to PMAR, there will be no money for infrastructure to support local business and services.
The "build out" discussion is useful in considering the maximum number of residents. However, it has limits. For example, we all know people who own one or more adjoining parcels -- Elizabeth and I own two adjoining parcels, and we know a number of other subdivision residents who do. So, each and every parcel is not necessarily destined to have a family on it.
Also, one suggestion that never got traction during early PCDP discussions was identifying parcels with high risk of lava inundation, subsidence along the coast, and other similar characteristics and changing their status so that building would not occur on them. These types of parcels exist in abundance in Puna and sell at the bottom of the market, or do not sell at all. So, while buying parcels for purposes of community safety and/or open space enhancement could be expensive, the cost of such parcels is a lot less than the "average" price in Puna. Not a panacea, but it could be part of the solution.
Finally, I firmly believe that a clear look at where the global economy is going in the coming decades shows a need to invest to reduce the transportation cost component of everything -- a highway between Puna and Hilo does the opposite.