ah, the unintended consequences

[kalakoa]

secede from the state and county with the freedom to create their own commercial zoning

At least try to incorporate a town, then sue State when "the rules" don't allow people to self-organize a governing entity.

[geochem]

quote:

---

Originally posted by randomq

As to the shady subdividing without services: many of us could not afford to be here if not for that money-grab.

---

Thank you randomq for the briefest nod to reality. Everyone seems to want to play the blame game as to why things don't meet their standard of perfection - and no one wants to look in the mirror and think about how they might have contributed to the current situation (or how their desired "improvements" may make a bad situation worse).

From a hazards perspective, none of the lower - and many of the upper - Puna residential subdivisions should exist. They will all, one day, be covered by lava flows. Maybe sooner, maybe later. But I can comfortably guarantee that it will happen. Everyone living in those subdivisions made a choice to purchase Brand X because it was cheaper than buying in Hilo (which is, admittedly, not free of lava flow hazard itself, albeit at a much lower overall risk). A far more appropriate land use for Lower Puna is farming and ranching - with much lower (sunk) infrastructure and capital costs per acre - and therefor losses - when the flows do come.

I won't fault Shipman for doing their best to ensure that agriculture is viable on their lands - including fighting, to their last breath, the installation of a network of roads that will expose their lessees to crop thefts that appear beyond the capacity of the County government to control.

Since this thread is titled "ah, the unintended consequences" I'll offer an imaginary future, as several thousand home owners watch lava flows covering their largest single asset, asking each other "who the dumb F's were that installed those four lane highways to Pahoa, to make it more convenient to build a home and live in Lower Puna, when they knew that those homes were going to be covered by lava flows?"

You've freely elected to buy and/or build in subdivisions that exist because of bad/irresponsible/venal (call it what you will) decisions made in the past with easily foreseeable consequences in the future. That doesn't mean that the County has to continue to make irresponsible decisions that will make those foreseeable consequences even worse for the future area residents or for the rest of the county's residents.

Apologies to any and all that I may have offended, but that's the reality that I see.

[kalakoa]

That doesn't mean that the County has to continue to make irresponsible decisions that will make those foreseeable consequences even worse

If County doesn't want the "burden" of these "doomed" subdivisions, fine, they can relinquish their control too: requiring permits and collecting property taxes creates an implied contract wherein residents will expect services -- and someday, this resident population will reach a critical mass which gives them the political clout to demand those services be provided.

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

geochem -
By and large I agree with your assessment. However, not everyone bought property in Puna based on their knowledge of geology and risk management. Most bought because the county offers building permits which would indicate to the average person a de facto approval that it's a good place to build a home. If not good, at least acceptable.

That doesn't mean that the County has to continue to make irresponsible decisions

Apparently, by continuing to offer building permits and collecting taxes without services they do in fact continue to make irresponsible decisions.

You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.

[geochem]

HOTPE, thanks for your comment. However, the situation with respect to the County is quite the opposite (and a demonstration of unintended consequences): their position is that, since the area has been subdivided, they are legally required to issue building permits consistent with the current zoning. If they deny a building permit, they become liable for that denial. The decisions made 40 or more years ago have tied their hands insofar as whether they can prevent building in an area that we now know is a bad idea to build.

As a side note on this, during Harry Kim's prior stint as Mayor, I approached his administration with these concerns and a method to reduce the density of residential development in Lower Puna - at little to no cost to the County - and was completely blown off. They simply refused to engage with the problem.

Unfortunately, this situation will only get worse until disaster strikes and a lot of people are displaced and bankrupted. Anything that is done to reduce the attractiveness of residential development on these at-risk lands, I have to see as a good thing.

[kalakoa]

whether they can prevent building in an area that we now know is a bad idea to build

It's always been a bad place to build, this isn't a "new discovery".

a method to reduce the density of residential development

Also spelled out in the PCDP: downzone the "agricultural" lands to achieve lower density. Unfortunately this means the "worthless" lands would "lose value", and that obviously cannot be allowed.

since the area has been subdivided, they are legally required to issue building permits consistent with the current zoning

They are also (legally?) bound to investigate any non-compliance issues only if and when a complaint is made.

this situation will only get worse until disaster strikes

How soon we forget: disaster almost struck in 2014. In any case, no need to wait for disaster; we can simply file complaints against every single lot in every subdivision and demand that County validate compliance of all structures, driveways, etc.

[Obie]

According to the Counties Hazard Mitigation plan, tropical cyclones are the highest hazard followed by earthquakes and tsunamis.Lava flows come in number 4.

http://records.co.hawaii.hi.us/weblink/DocView.aspx?dbid=1&id=82052&cr=1

[Chunkster]

quote:

---

Originally posted by geochem


As a side note on this, during Harry Kim's prior stint as Mayor, I approached his administration with these concerns and a method to reduce the density of residential development in Lower Puna - at little to no cost to the County - and was completely blown off. They simply refused to engage with the problem.

---

I had the same experience in a direct conversation with Kim himself. He smiled the whole time he was telling me to get lost and stop bothering him with difficult, complicated issues.

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

their position is that, since the area has been subdivided, they are legally required to issue building permits

Subdivisions with potential hazards can be found all over the US. My parents bought a home 3/4 mile from a river. Most of the area near the river was farmland so when it occasionally flooded it didn't create much a problem (as with your example of a farming and ranching zoned Puna). My folks lived 4 houses from the edge of town, and once the river rose so high it came within 2 or 3 lots of their property.

Years went by, the farmer sold to a developer who received subdivision approval from the city council who like the County of Hawaii, wanted the increased tax base revenue. If you ask anyone who bought a house near the river, almost no one expects a flood will one day fill their basements.

So which came first? The chicken or the egg? The developer or the council? The county or the homeowner? In the end, government entities involved in these tax mining schemes will not surprisingly point to a lack of personal responsibility by the last person who bought the property.

[kalakoa]

find fault with the lack of personal responsibility shown by the last person to buy the property

This is why I suggest more mandatory real estate disclosure, up to and including buyer's signature acknowledging receipt and understanding of said disclosure.

Otherwise, it's back to "County requires permits and payment of taxes, therefore the land must be suitable for such use".

I would gladly waive County's liability if they also waived their requirements.