Posts: 2,389
Threads: 126
Joined: Jun 2009
Lets consider a worst case scenario within the realm of reasonable possibility.
Let's assume everything from just North of Pahoa down to just North the Beaches becomes inundated heavily and the region south is cut off.
Yes, there is the COCR connection in progress but the question arises - why not a small emergency services port? Large enough to handle barges during emergency and obviously for pleasure craft launching and while at it broad enough to launch fishing boats regularly? This scenario should be applied within the PCDP and a couple locations should be selected and noted for serious consideration. This should be an inland excavated port because the offshore drop is far too great to establish a piled rock jetty type port. Kapoho is an excellent strategic location because if it's inundated the surrounding areas aren't cut off by such a flow and still retain access to Hilo as usual.
Why isn't this in the PCDP proposal?
Posts: 2,389
Threads: 126
Joined: Jun 2009
Along with a port should be a small airport one that can ALSO handle tourist helicopters. Then the tour birds can take up residence there and fly tourist a short distance to sight see the volcano and stay out of the skies above our populated neighborhoods. This not only provides for an air emergency services location it saves the tour birds added fuel cost and provides for a quieter Puna.
One possible location for tour birds could be just South of Malama market where they are clearing all that land back there (assuming the owner would lease or part with it for that use) next to the market. From there they can fly on up to Pu'u O'o and around it etc.
Why isn't this in the PCDP?
Posts: 14,144
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
an occupation of that which has already been designated
The "problem" is not the subdivisions per se, but the need for services as those subdivisions approach 100% occupancy, and the existing land-use designations effectively leave nowhere for those services to be built.
If Puna is destined to remain a bedroom community forever, it will need many more lane-miles of road to Drive To Hilo For Everything.
If Puna is going to actually develop into a "real" place, it will need some appropriately zoned land, possibly with additional lane-miles of access road.
The "sprawl" has already happened. I often run errands in two or more parts of "Greater Keaau" (Transfer Station, New Commercial, Industrial Park, and Old Town), and each is effectively a separate trip up and down the highway -- almost as if they're isolated little downs, all developed independently.
Why isn't this (small heliport) in the PCDP?
Because Shipman doesn't own a tour helicopter company?
Posts: 2,389
Threads: 126
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,389
Threads: 126
Joined: Jun 2009
All we can do is hope that the latest lava threat and damage has taken a foothold into the minds of those creating plans for this area.
It's going to take some creative out of the box thinking to address this region properly. Simply ignoring the issue in hopes no-one will move here won't work and will only exacerbate future problems.
Simple things such as a full coastal route between Hilo and Kalapana places a main route furthest from the reach of Kilauea caldera activity while still upon its slopes. Inundation of the beach road occurring from an origin position Makai 130 upon the rift still leaves 130 as a full alternative route. Where flows that inundate 130 originating mauka 130 upon the rift still leave a coastal route as a viable alternate unless both are inundated at the same time which is probably least frequent a likelihood than all the other probabilities possible but why a port should be created just in case.
I read the PCDP and I see sections of the old beach road penned in as a hiking trail? I'm sorry but that line of thinking is simply ignoring this regions future needs and replacing them with dreams, dreams that WILL ultimately prove harmful to the future community should they be adopted. 130 will be inundated everywhere as will railroad and the beach road, but the likelihood of all three being inundated at the same time will occur far less frequently than just one or two being inundated at a time. The closer to the ocean down the rift a flow begins the less likely it is to cause a full cut off of the region when a coastal route compliments 130.
As per the zoning is concerned. Specialty zones could be assigned to almost all AG 3 and select areas of Ag 1 and select areas of smaller parcel zone areas within and South of the basin. These could allow for an XYZ service to be allowed without additional special zoning requirements if no other XYZ services are within x miles of the cited project. XYZ for example, a convenience grocer, dual pump gas station with approved above ground tanks (like a 7-11 with a double gas pump). Small restaurants could be allowed on the coast with a cap on capacity every x miles. Promoting small business to spring forth would be helpful. The current agricultural restriction shouldn't be applied to this region as it's far too much agriculture area and not enough with regard to local community public services. Jumping the hurdles to get special zoning for small convenience stores or an enclosed small restaurant, etc. isn't helping things. We need more local services as to stop relying so heavily on single location box type market areas that can be inundated at any time - leaving the region without any such services. Expanding zoning uses accompanied by simplifying building codes to bare minimum standards through the zoning regulations and adopting above ground fuel storage tanks etc. would help to make this area less susceptible to any single lava flow event that would otherwise cause major problems community wide. A great deal more flexibility is necessary in this region if the State and County don't want to lose many more millions in the future regarding lava flows.
This region will never represent a typical community and should not be restricted to the common standard model. It cannot be done as long as lava flows from Kilauea and expecting it to meld into a typical community mold is neither reasonable or intelligent.
Posts: 3,234
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2009
Kane - you've clearly put a lot of time and thought into these posts. Unfortunately many of these good ideas are predicated on the notion that the county has any interest in providing services or supporting growth in Puna.
They have shown in a variety of subtle and not so subtle ways that they wish to continue the tax-mine principle that founded most of the Puna subdivisions. Lack of useful zoning and "Drive to Hilo" continues this policy by limiting growth in Puna and offsets any support cost for commuting to the State, which only improves the highway when forced.
Rob, do you have any articles, links, etc about the fuel tax lawsuit and the fed to state to county to PCDP process to free up those funds and supposedly direct the development process? I understand the broad strokes of what happened but would be interested in more of the details.
All this said, I've been intrigued by the actions of this Planning Commission as they appear to bucking the policy. Whether this is because some key members reside in Puna and actually care or if it's just some part in the larger interests by the county is unclear, but it doesn't appear to be business as usual IMO.
Posts: 14,144
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
hope that the latest lava threat and damage has taken a foothold into the minds of those creating plans for this area.
It has: new development in LZ1/LZ2 has ceased.
It's going to take some creative out of the box thinking to address this region properly.
As I've suggested on various occasions: "first-world" development standards are not appropriate for lower Puna. Unfortunately, that's what we have; the Powers That Be are (somehow) only able to apply a One-Size-Fits-All standard. That they meanwhile turn a blind eye towards the rampant unpermittedness strongly suggests a hidden agenda.
the fuel tax lawsuit and the fed to state to county to PCDP process to free up those funds
If I recall correctly, the requirement was only to "create a plan" that included "community input", but without any stipulation that the plan actually be followed, such that the actual planning "process" creates pointless busywork with the illusion of participation.
The resulting PCDP calls out a laundry list of issues that are already well-known, then suggests that we create "designated commercial centers" in exactly the places where these already exist. It's not so much a "plan" as it is an "inventory".
Posts: 2,389
Threads: 126
Joined: Jun 2009
Kalakoa,
Yes - That blind eye may indeed be the Counties way of providing flexibility. It also extends into land use regulations also, which is extremely unusual. Unpermitted builds exist across the nation to some degree or another in given areas but unpermitted land use situations are typically frowned upon and not usually ignored. That is fairly unique to this area.
The county might be able to utilize land use regulations to create an exemption for owner builder permits on SF structures in this area while mandating contractor build sf structures not to be exempt from the permit process unless the owner waves the protection.
Unfortunately the State left it up to the individual counties to either adopt or not adopt building codes but if they adopted them, they were instructed to make all builds subject to the permit process. In order to untie the Counties hands, the State would need to enter an optional exemption for this region. That being said, I know they use the land use regulations to exempt given agricultural structures from the permit process.
We'd probably need to petition the State to restructure that portion of the State law to untie the Counties hands for this region. That's the culprit behind the inflexible codes applied to this region. I'd have to dig back through the State of Hawaii revised statutes to cite the exact HRS that's the "elephant in the room".
Posts: 910
Threads: 20
Joined: Nov 2006
After living in the Philippines two years one thing I have come to understand is the lament in the song about a little grass shack.
You wouldn't believe how incredible a little grass shack made from bamboo and nape palm leaves can be.
At night I see them lit by a single candle.
The carbon footprint of my behemoth house with pool, hot tub, tiled walls, sheet rock, cement patios etc etc is likely 200-500 times that of a grass shack.
Permitting people to live closer to that ideal little grass shack would be nice
My home even has glass windows and Corian countertops. Imagine.
Former Puna Beach Resident
Now sailing in SE Asia
HOT BuOYS Sailing
Posts: 14,144
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
That blind eye may indeed be the Counties way of providing flexibility. It also extends into land use regulations
This "flexibility" could be revoked at any time and for any reason, at which point there is no recourse due to the "illegal" structures or land-use.
exempt given agricultural structures from the permit process
Only where those structures are not used for habitation.
