12-08-2008, 09:46 AM
The Puna CDP designates Railroad as a hike/bike/recreation corridor. It is easy to assume that Railroad is a quick answer when they are still publishing maps that erroneously seem to show it as an existing road. However, aside from the right of way issues described by Rob, Railroad has other drawbacks. A big one is the fact that it meanders across HPP rather than being parallel to the other cross-HPP roads. Thus, it would have multiple intersections with other roads, rather than just the three (or four if Shower is crossed) a parallel route would take.
As a frequent attendee at HPP official meetings, I can tell you all that our community does not have a consensus on how to deal with the PMAR crossing the subdivision. Right now we are preoccupied with the road paving project, and nobody talks much about the PMAR. When I suggested at one meeting that the PMAR might be a way to get at least one road paved at somebody else's expense, I think most of the group thought I was joking. There are some people opposed to the PMAR on various principles such as environmentalism and rural preservation, and others opposed from a NIMBY mindset.
My own feeling is that something needs to be done, and for that to happen with the least possible disruption, opposition, and legal delays, we need to be talking and forming a consensus. Dr. James Weatherford has made some constructive and innovative suggestions which could serve as a model and starting point for discussion. I invite him to rehash those ideas here to start such a process.
Cheers,
Jerry
As a frequent attendee at HPP official meetings, I can tell you all that our community does not have a consensus on how to deal with the PMAR crossing the subdivision. Right now we are preoccupied with the road paving project, and nobody talks much about the PMAR. When I suggested at one meeting that the PMAR might be a way to get at least one road paved at somebody else's expense, I think most of the group thought I was joking. There are some people opposed to the PMAR on various principles such as environmentalism and rural preservation, and others opposed from a NIMBY mindset.
My own feeling is that something needs to be done, and for that to happen with the least possible disruption, opposition, and legal delays, we need to be talking and forming a consensus. Dr. James Weatherford has made some constructive and innovative suggestions which could serve as a model and starting point for discussion. I invite him to rehash those ideas here to start such a process.
Cheers,
Jerry