01-26-2007, 09:13 AM
Okay, I'll try. The question is:
Could you please tell,what you personally and your working group think should be done about highway 130?
Answer:
First off my working group is the Land Use WG, not the Transportatiton WG. Land Use WG's point of view (soon to be submitted to the Steering Commttee) is that Hwy 130 should remain an agricultural/residential corridor with zero commercial uses.
This is to :
a) preserve the rural atmosphere of Puna. (prevent sprawl)
b) enhance and support the creation and development of localized village centers both existing (Pahoa & Keaau) and future (HPP, Ainaloa,++).
As to improvements to Hwy 130:
1. Traffic Safety topics are being addressed by the Transportation WG.
2. The state DOT is already in process to munch up $60 million and tie up traffic for two or more years in adding traffic lights and lanes toward Pahoa. Probably a done deal. Some will applaud (those who like driving 60+ mph) and some will grumble (those who prefer a more laid back Hawaiian style life).
3. More cars moving faster is, to my view and, I believe the majority of our WG, a method of development that did not work well in Honolulu ($4.5 billion proposed for mass transit) and will not work well here.
4. I would personally prefer safety improvements such as:
a. traffic police at major intersections during rush hours now (1st put forth by Gary Safarik) to control turns.
b. Improved egress lanes for entering and exiting Hwy 130 at all major subdivisions.
c. Lower speed limits (enforced)
d. Experimental traffic lights at key intersections (1st put forth by Brian Jordan).
e. Full review and consideration of all CDP recommendations before full blown committment to a Hwy 130 4+ lane dedication.
Just my P.O.V. [I may be wrong about who proposed what first - if so please forgive me]
Could you please tell,what you personally and your working group think should be done about highway 130?
Answer:
First off my working group is the Land Use WG, not the Transportatiton WG. Land Use WG's point of view (soon to be submitted to the Steering Commttee) is that Hwy 130 should remain an agricultural/residential corridor with zero commercial uses.
This is to :
a) preserve the rural atmosphere of Puna. (prevent sprawl)
b) enhance and support the creation and development of localized village centers both existing (Pahoa & Keaau) and future (HPP, Ainaloa,++).
As to improvements to Hwy 130:
1. Traffic Safety topics are being addressed by the Transportation WG.
2. The state DOT is already in process to munch up $60 million and tie up traffic for two or more years in adding traffic lights and lanes toward Pahoa. Probably a done deal. Some will applaud (those who like driving 60+ mph) and some will grumble (those who prefer a more laid back Hawaiian style life).
3. More cars moving faster is, to my view and, I believe the majority of our WG, a method of development that did not work well in Honolulu ($4.5 billion proposed for mass transit) and will not work well here.
4. I would personally prefer safety improvements such as:
a. traffic police at major intersections during rush hours now (1st put forth by Gary Safarik) to control turns.
b. Improved egress lanes for entering and exiting Hwy 130 at all major subdivisions.
c. Lower speed limits (enforced)
d. Experimental traffic lights at key intersections (1st put forth by Brian Jordan).
e. Full review and consideration of all CDP recommendations before full blown committment to a Hwy 130 4+ lane dedication.
Just my P.O.V. [I may be wrong about who proposed what first - if so please forgive me]
Assume the best and ask questions.
Punaweb moderator
Punaweb moderator