05-12-2009, 12:07 PM
I'd just like to give an "attaboy/attagirl/attaperson" to those who are involved in this discussion here on PunaWeb, and more importantly, at the level of local governance.
I'm not informed enough to voice an opinion about which proposal is better, but I'm grateful to see the issues aired and discussed. Without supporting Rob T.'s specific plan, I will say that I think he's absolutely on target with the concept of lack of planning resulting in poor outcomes. The Honolulu example is a good one, but there are many others, i.e. the L.A. basin, the "Big Dig" in Boston, etc.
And from what I've seen, urban planning, traffic planning, development plans, "zones of influence", etc., are meaningless unless they are carried out to actuality. Every time that an application for a waiver or exemption to the plan is granted (cronyism can creep into this process) is an instance where something will have to be made up for in the future.
Good luck and best wishes.
Aloha! ;-)
I'm not informed enough to voice an opinion about which proposal is better, but I'm grateful to see the issues aired and discussed. Without supporting Rob T.'s specific plan, I will say that I think he's absolutely on target with the concept of lack of planning resulting in poor outcomes. The Honolulu example is a good one, but there are many others, i.e. the L.A. basin, the "Big Dig" in Boston, etc.
And from what I've seen, urban planning, traffic planning, development plans, "zones of influence", etc., are meaningless unless they are carried out to actuality. Every time that an application for a waiver or exemption to the plan is granted (cronyism can creep into this process) is an instance where something will have to be made up for in the future.
Good luck and best wishes.
Aloha! ;-)
Aloha! ;-)