Re: [Puna-WG-eval] PCDP Working group feedback
Hi Fran,
Forwarding your good comments now. Thank you!
I agree, a commercial kitchen in our area or in each
community would add a huge economic opportunity for so
many people who can't otherwise get jobs due to poor
transportation options.
You might also be happy to hear that the State is
going to renovate the area between Kulani Road and the
school. (within the next 3 years?)
Highway is out of the County's juri, but connector
roads could be county maintained. I think that if the
connector roads were also the school grounds/community
center (or cultural center, depending on area
residents desires/county services centers too, there
could be a lot of savings, like you say, one
multi-purpose building per community (or two), might
just work.
Mahalo,
Kim
--- Kim Tavares <kimtavares@...> wrote:
> Hi Rob, All,
>
> My first impression of the transportation
> presentation
> REVIEW was that it seems that planners are still
> looking for more input, and not yet ready to lay out
> any solid plans (that we can massacre).
>
> But that is actually what's happening now. I
> listened
> to the full presentation last night, with
> comments/questions from the audience in Volcano. If
> you can attend one of today's meetings, it's highly
> recommended.
>
> Rather than focusing on the process, provide the
> Wayne
> with useful comments. He is summarizing the PRCP,
> PCDP, old CDP's, STIP and all the other products on
> the Hawaii Island Plan Puna website, and analyzing
> them from a non-stakeholder's perspective (we
> assume),
> and presenting his interpretation of what they are
> saying.
>
> We are being promised that in the near future, he
> will
> come back to present us with various options, models
> that will include a variety of cause/reaction
> scenarios that we will have to think over, and then
> sink our scissors into.
>
> My personal take on it is that it seems to be a
> reasonable approach to resolving some traffic, but
> it
> scares me to death to see that this process (LAND
> USE
> PLANNING) actually IS being driven by transportation
> planning, WHICH IS EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT
> SHOULD
> BE OCCURRING.
>
> We are not going to fix traffic problems, by
> building
> or improving the roads. All that will do is
> accommodate more traffic, and it will come. Someone
> said that last night, and I totally agree.
>
> CONNECTIVITY, another issue that always comes up, is
> another that always prompts me to comment. I think
> it
> is vitally important to have connectivity, to serve
> as
> emergency access routes and to provide off highway
> alternatives to various locations. But in upper
> Puna,
> so many of those locations are not yet defined.
> Potential links are proposed in many places, but
> they
> don't go anywhere. I firmly believe we should
> decide
> what we want and where it goes first. Otherwise,
> improved roads will make those decisions for us, and
> we get what we get.
>
> Nobody wants to go to town all the time, but there
> are
> no other alternatives right now.
>
> We need to answer the questions What are we trying
> to
> connect, and for what purpose? and, What does
> upper Puna need to stop contributing to daily
> traffic
> loads on the highway to Keaau and Hilo?
>
> 1. More elementary schools/day care centers
> 2. A small high-school/night-school/community
> college
> campus
> 3. More community offices, and a large community
> gathering space, county services
> 4. Medical clinics or emergency care facilities
> 5. Indoors & outdoors recreation facilities
> 6. Financial institutions
>
> To make this happen, I suggest we make our NEEDS our
> economic base, and our public centers are the hubs
> for
> connectivity. Where do we put all this stuff, and
> make it somewhat low-impact? I have some ideas, and
> the Volcano Health folks are also looking around,
> but
> Id like to hear some of yours too!
>
> Thanks,
> Kim
>
>
>
>
>
> --- Rob Tucker <castleb@...> wrote:
>
> > Aloha to all of you on the Land Use Working Group.
> >
> > John Whalen of Plan Pacific, the consultant on the
> > CDP, has delivered a
> > summary and comment on most, but not all, of the
> WG
> > reports.
> >
> > I am attaching the summary here for your reading
> > enjoyment. It is 38
> > pages and I thought it rather well organized.
> >
> > I attended the May 17th Steering Committee meeting
> > which included a
> > presentation by a transportation consultant hired
> by
> > the county.
> > Personally I thought him particularly uninformed
> on
> > the Puna CDP and I
> > left the meeting after he took some long amount of
> > time explaining that
> > the key issues were the key issues. I sensed a
> > consultant, raised and
> > bred in conventional highway development, who is
> > there to tell and not
> > listen. I hope I am wrong.
> >
> > Mahalo,
> >
> > Rob
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________Fussy?
> Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join
> Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us.
>
http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________Looking
for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/
RSS Feed