07-29-2008, 04:44 AM
quote:Mr. Walter may work for a powerful entity, but the State and County have the well-established right of imminent domain to condemn and purchase property for necessary roadways. Of course, they could hold it up in court for years, and perhaps that is what he meant, but Shipman can't just say "no, and that's that."
Originally posted by Rob Tucker
Punafish that is not a simple question to answer. I would respond that Hwy. 130 widening is likely but not a done deal unless we think it is.
Recently Bill Walter of W.H. Shipman Ltd. who owns land through which an alternate route would pass disclosed his intention to block an alternate route if he does not get the amendments he wants in the PCDP when he wants them. We were very sorry to hear this but are not sure if it is just bluster or not.
Punaweb moderator
My problem with the Shipman approach to development in Puna (other than the sheer arrogance sometimes shown) is the fact that they have their own plan concentrating commercial activity at the T-junction in Keaau and nearby. They have already obtained zoning approval for this conditional on their paying for some road layout changes. To me this seems counter to the village center concept, and only cuts about five miles off the usual trip to Hilo that so many of us make for groceries, etc. It does little or nothing to relieve traffic on the worst stretch of 130, especially if they try to block an alternative route.
The four-laning of 130 will give the Shipmans some cover for their plan, as it will supposedly relieve some of the traffic pressure their proposed developments will create. The State DOT has resolutely refused to seriously consider citizen criticism of their widening project. The longer everything gets stalled, the more inevitable all this becomes. More arrogance.
Cheers,
Jerry