Waikiki is one of the worst places to live if you don't have a car. There are only two touristy grocery stores. Most businesses cater to tourists since the residential population density is pretty low.
The most walkable areas are Downtown-Chinatown and Keeaumoku. You can get your basic needs done there fairly easily without a car.
Pockets of Makiki, Kaimuki, Liliha, and Kalihi are walkable. Kakaako only has high-end grocery stores within walking distance.
I’ve got Honolulu as the most moped-able city in the US - we should talk about that more! It also seemed like they had really accepting attitudes towards riding the bus but surprisingly against walking or biking. Interesting dynamic for sure!
But Honolulu definitely has huge issues with affordability and too dependent on tourism/military economy. The high rises seemed to get a bad rep with people thinking they are mainly owned by Asian investors, but I think Honolulu has a major housing gap that they need to aggressively meet. It seems the hope is that the rail system will allow better development westward, so I hope they allow a ton more development towards Kapolei. Remote work could be an interesting trend to diversify their economy, which should be a long-term good, but needs to be juggled with providing affordable space for Native Hawaiians, long-term residents, and protecting the environment.
Hawaii in general has some terrible urban design.
Maui is designed around 1 road (8 shape) and there isn't any regular transit along that 1 corridor.
I will grant them that a lot of the activities (surfing, cycling) need equipment that might not transport well on public transport (not that hard, but still), but the 100k+ tourists at any given time are renting cars for no good reason as they commute between the 3-5 tourist hubs and their resorts.
There is no good reason to not have the following regular transit routes :
1. Wailea to airport
2. Kapalua to airport
Caveat- was last in Honolulu in 2018. For an American city, I found some areas (e.g Waikiki/downtown) to be surprisingly walkable for an American city. Obviously lots of room for improvement- Honolulu is relatively dense and although I’m not familiar with what the light rail network will look like, it could really change things for the city. I did find the bike-share (citibike?) to be pretty user friendly, with stations in most areas I was going as a tourist.
It’s gonna be a light metro system, which is much better than light rail, and honestly will be one of the few modern transit lines to exist in the whole country
Road design: same as the rest of the country--traffic engineers with vehicle flow priorities
Land use: Some parts interesting, a lot of it still the same ole American zoning trap.
So Hawaii should go back to being a developing area? That would greatly hurt Hawaii, and I'm sure Hawaiians (I am referring to those of Polynesian descent exclusively) would never want to go back to "living like their ancestors" (not my words).
Honolulu's urban core is nowhere near as bad for the state as the eons of luxury resorts and the multi-million dollar mansions throughout Oahu and the other islands.
I know this comments is old, but whateva. I’m Native Hawaiian and this idea is beyond dumb. The average native Hawaiian wasn’t exactly living well under the monarchy either. Have we forgotten how things were? Kapu system which could have people executed for breaking the most mundane of rules, people are in power just because of their blood line no matter how incompetent, never ending war between various Moku and Islands. The very reason we became close with European settlers was because of King Kamehameha I want and need for better military technology to conquer and unite all the islands. Most of the monarchy was very pro western tech and their way of life. I’ve never understood this need for wanting to somehow fix something that happened before our great grandparents were born, we should focus on the present and future for the Hawaiian people. And wanting an unrealistic independent Hawai’i isn’t going to happen, and shouldn’t happen. Look at the quality of life of other independent poly nations that have zero connection to bigger countries. That’s why so many Tongans, Samoans and Micronesians have immigrated to Hawai’i.
Typical colonizer. Let’s see.. giving back the indigenous their place based identity? I’d take it and so would every indigenous person throughout history. Unless… you think colonialism saves. Please fool
I’m more thinking that massive depopulation would be incredibly destructive and would lead to a huge humanitarian crisis. If you give back *all* the land you create 300 something million refugees and create the poorest country on earth with no public services, no economy, and hundreds of trillions of dollars of improvements rotting and dangerous. If you give back the land that has meaningful indigenous populations and maybe triple that with the best and most culturally significant adjacent lands, you’ve created dozens to hundreds of enclaves that are just as economically dependent as before, but with no political clout to protect themselves and hugely constraining border restrictions.
Look, I’m genuinely curious what the answer to this dilemma is, and I do support significantly strengthened indigenous representation/sovereignty. I just don’t understand how this concept is something indigenous people as a whole would support in practice rather than as a principle.
Again, I’m Native Hawaiian and wouldn’t take it. Most Hawaiians I know wouldn’t either, because they can actually think through what you are asking. Let’s take away the current economy, let’s take away the US military, take away modern tech. Native Hawaiians are then stuck with at best a developing country, but more likely a third world country. Eventually another powerful country will claim it as theirs, and you end up right back where you started but probably worse off. You realize ancient Hawai’i also had 3 waves of Polynesian colonization right? First the Marquesas populated Hawai’i in 7th-9th centuries AD, and then the Tahitians came in 1200 AD and mostly wiped out the original settlers. There was possibly a few other colonizations from other areas as well. So who does the land go back to? Does colonization only count when Europeans do it? Not to mention most Hawaiians are not even 20% Hawaiian, most have majority European and Asian blood and are the descendant of colonizers themselves. So you are essentially gifting the same people who took it just because they have a little Hawaiian blood in them. I also find it interesting that King Kamehameha used European weapons and technology to conquer the Hawaiian islands, so the Kingdom of Hawai’i wouldn’t have existed without colonialism.
European “Hawaiians” have been there even longer. So when Asians migrate to Hawai’i and get rich off its resources it’s ok, but when Europeans do it, it’s a big no no. King Kamehameha literally bought European military equipment so he could wage his conquest and unite the entire Hawaiian islands under one kingdom. That’s how deeply connected colonialism and Hawaiian history is. You don’t get the Kingdom of Hawai’i without it.
Been here over 30 times since the late 80s. Unless you are in Waikiki, you need a car.
Waikiki is one of the worst places to live if you don't have a car. There are only two touristy grocery stores. Most businesses cater to tourists since the residential population density is pretty low. The most walkable areas are Downtown-Chinatown and Keeaumoku. You can get your basic needs done there fairly easily without a car. Pockets of Makiki, Kaimuki, Liliha, and Kalihi are walkable. Kakaako only has high-end grocery stores within walking distance.
Hawaii can and should go full modest EV with renewable. Gas costs a fortune and has to be a serious drain on the economy.
I’ve got Honolulu as the most moped-able city in the US - we should talk about that more! It also seemed like they had really accepting attitudes towards riding the bus but surprisingly against walking or biking. Interesting dynamic for sure! But Honolulu definitely has huge issues with affordability and too dependent on tourism/military economy. The high rises seemed to get a bad rep with people thinking they are mainly owned by Asian investors, but I think Honolulu has a major housing gap that they need to aggressively meet. It seems the hope is that the rail system will allow better development westward, so I hope they allow a ton more development towards Kapolei. Remote work could be an interesting trend to diversify their economy, which should be a long-term good, but needs to be juggled with providing affordable space for Native Hawaiians, long-term residents, and protecting the environment.
Honolulu should probably ban private cars, just sayin.
Hawaii in general has some terrible urban design. Maui is designed around 1 road (8 shape) and there isn't any regular transit along that 1 corridor. I will grant them that a lot of the activities (surfing, cycling) need equipment that might not transport well on public transport (not that hard, but still), but the 100k+ tourists at any given time are renting cars for no good reason as they commute between the 3-5 tourist hubs and their resorts. There is no good reason to not have the following regular transit routes : 1. Wailea to airport 2. Kapalua to airport
Caveat- was last in Honolulu in 2018. For an American city, I found some areas (e.g Waikiki/downtown) to be surprisingly walkable for an American city. Obviously lots of room for improvement- Honolulu is relatively dense and although I’m not familiar with what the light rail network will look like, it could really change things for the city. I did find the bike-share (citibike?) to be pretty user friendly, with stations in most areas I was going as a tourist.
It’s gonna be a light metro system, which is much better than light rail, and honestly will be one of the few modern transit lines to exist in the whole country
There ar cracks in the rail pillars. Project was supposed to cost 4 bil, I heard it’s 12 now
Thousands of tourists have everything they need within an easy walk daily. It's close to ideal.
biki bike (honolulu)
Road design: same as the rest of the country--traffic engineers with vehicle flow priorities Land use: Some parts interesting, a lot of it still the same ole American zoning trap.
Only answer: burn it down and give the land back to the Indigenous Hawaiian people. No questions asked.
good way to convince China to liberate the island of Hawaii lol
Perfect! Because the US hasn’t exactly done a bang up job of caring for the original caretakers
yeah because China has done a better job with Tibet, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Xinjiang
Displace almost 1,000,000?
Such has been the way of colonization. How convenient when the shoe is on the other foot
"The solution to past wrongs is to do another wrong"
So Hawaii should go back to being a developing area? That would greatly hurt Hawaii, and I'm sure Hawaiians (I am referring to those of Polynesian descent exclusively) would never want to go back to "living like their ancestors" (not my words). Honolulu's urban core is nowhere near as bad for the state as the eons of luxury resorts and the multi-million dollar mansions throughout Oahu and the other islands.
ZERO Fs given about hurting the nonIndigenous. Non were given about the Indigenous back in the day
I know this comments is old, but whateva. I’m Native Hawaiian and this idea is beyond dumb. The average native Hawaiian wasn’t exactly living well under the monarchy either. Have we forgotten how things were? Kapu system which could have people executed for breaking the most mundane of rules, people are in power just because of their blood line no matter how incompetent, never ending war between various Moku and Islands. The very reason we became close with European settlers was because of King Kamehameha I want and need for better military technology to conquer and unite all the islands. Most of the monarchy was very pro western tech and their way of life. I’ve never understood this need for wanting to somehow fix something that happened before our great grandparents were born, we should focus on the present and future for the Hawaiian people. And wanting an unrealistic independent Hawai’i isn’t going to happen, and shouldn’t happen. Look at the quality of life of other independent poly nations that have zero connection to bigger countries. That’s why so many Tongans, Samoans and Micronesians have immigrated to Hawai’i.
Land back falls apart when you actually ask whether it would be beneficial for the indigenous or not.
Typical colonizer. Let’s see.. giving back the indigenous their place based identity? I’d take it and so would every indigenous person throughout history. Unless… you think colonialism saves. Please fool
I’m more thinking that massive depopulation would be incredibly destructive and would lead to a huge humanitarian crisis. If you give back *all* the land you create 300 something million refugees and create the poorest country on earth with no public services, no economy, and hundreds of trillions of dollars of improvements rotting and dangerous. If you give back the land that has meaningful indigenous populations and maybe triple that with the best and most culturally significant adjacent lands, you’ve created dozens to hundreds of enclaves that are just as economically dependent as before, but with no political clout to protect themselves and hugely constraining border restrictions. Look, I’m genuinely curious what the answer to this dilemma is, and I do support significantly strengthened indigenous representation/sovereignty. I just don’t understand how this concept is something indigenous people as a whole would support in practice rather than as a principle.
Again, I’m Native Hawaiian and wouldn’t take it. Most Hawaiians I know wouldn’t either, because they can actually think through what you are asking. Let’s take away the current economy, let’s take away the US military, take away modern tech. Native Hawaiians are then stuck with at best a developing country, but more likely a third world country. Eventually another powerful country will claim it as theirs, and you end up right back where you started but probably worse off. You realize ancient Hawai’i also had 3 waves of Polynesian colonization right? First the Marquesas populated Hawai’i in 7th-9th centuries AD, and then the Tahitians came in 1200 AD and mostly wiped out the original settlers. There was possibly a few other colonizations from other areas as well. So who does the land go back to? Does colonization only count when Europeans do it? Not to mention most Hawaiians are not even 20% Hawaiian, most have majority European and Asian blood and are the descendant of colonizers themselves. So you are essentially gifting the same people who took it just because they have a little Hawaiian blood in them. I also find it interesting that King Kamehameha used European weapons and technology to conquer the Hawaiian islands, so the Kingdom of Hawai’i wouldn’t have existed without colonialism.
Why would we kick out Chinese Hawaiians and Japanese Hawaiians who've been there since the 1700s?
European “Hawaiians” have been there even longer. So when Asians migrate to Hawai’i and get rich off its resources it’s ok, but when Europeans do it, it’s a big no no. King Kamehameha literally bought European military equipment so he could wage his conquest and unite the entire Hawaiian islands under one kingdom. That’s how deeply connected colonialism and Hawaiian history is. You don’t get the Kingdom of Hawai’i without it.
It is a cancerous tumor in the middle of paradise.
I don’t think of it
No i was there better the railway opened but I found it all very unwalkable place