Posts: 1,858
Threads: 46
Joined: Apr 2015
quote:
Originally posted by wax
I work in the park. Getting out at from 3 to 5 is extremely unsafe. Accidents are increasing. The day will come when a low bed truck will not be able to pull all the way out to the middle and a car heading home to Puna will smash the end of it with probable death occurring. This is about safety for the 2,000 people working in the park and for the daily traffic in and out. So you can send in testimony and you can rally around your reps, but you are only causing a bad situation to get more difficult. If the light were someone's responsibility - they would have been made to put it in. This is a State intersection which is why the State appears to be funding it and HDOT is ok with it. I have to admit that I do not understand why hating the Shipman group would cause one to give pain to the rest of us.
The problem is not with the regular people who do not want another traffic light it is with the fat cats who trample we the people.
Besides, there is already a place for proper Shipman ingress/egress.
The problem is easily solved by having the three-way light where 130 meets 11 converted to a four-way. Traffic coming from Pahoa and going to Shipman stays on 130 and goes straight ACROSS highway 11. Wiliama Place gets extended to meet up and voila - your new traffic light for Shipman!
You may see there is a Papaya field where I am talking about -surely we can inconvenience a couple of farmers before we inconvenience all of Puna?
Posts: 14,107
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
easily solved by having the three-way light where 130 meets 11 converted to a four-way
Along with a similar extension from E Kipimana around to Ulupono, as I suggested above.
The Wiliama-Keaau extension would make an ideal location for a row of low-rise mixed-use buildings; upstairs residential units would have an awesome view of the ocean.
Posts: 1,440
Threads: 4
Joined: Sep 2014
"You may see there is a Papaya field where I am talking about -surely we can inconvenience a couple of farmers before we inconvenience all of Puna?"
Do we know it would be a mere inconvenience for those farming that papaya? I don't know who is farming there and what their situation is, do you?
Posts: 1,070
Threads: 9
Joined: Mar 2014
Shipman leases the plots to the Papaya farmers and other farmers on a yearly basis .
Eventually will be Gateway plaza at the Kea'au Pahoa light on the Mauka side - thus making it a 4 way light .
Till that time another light at the current ingress and egress to the Industrial park is certainly welcome .
Mrs . Mimosa
Posts: 11,016
Threads: 750
Joined: Sep 2012
The problem is easily solved by having the three-way light where 130 meets 11 converted to a four-way.
Perfect solution.
When it's busy people can choose to enter and exit the industrial park at a stop light. The rest of the day, non rush hour, non school bus related times, there would be two convenient choices, one with a light, one without.
Will it work? Let's look at what the rest of us manage in our daily commute:
How many HPP residents enter and exit Hwy 130 without a stoplight? (11,000 residents) More than the Industrial Park.
How many people drive from lower Puna to the Hwy 11 intersection with lights only at Keaau High? (30,000+ residents in lower Puna?) More than the Industrial Park.
Wouldn't a second road into Puna alleviate our traffic problems? Is the person who wants his own personal stop light at his Industrial Park, paid for by the taxpayers, willing to recognize other people have traffic congestion as well? Even greater than the Industrial Park?
"How we spend our days is, of course, how we spend our lives." -Annie Dillard
"I'm at that stage in life where I stay out of discussions. Even if you say 1+1=5, you're right - have fun." - Keanu Reeves
Posts: 14,107
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
Wouldn't a second road into Puna alleviate our traffic problems?
Yes, but nobody will allow it to be built -- Shipman doesn't seem willing to give up the land, nor does HPP want more traffic through "their private subdivision".
The other alternative, same as always, would be to allow more commercial development in lower Puna, so that fewer trips to Hilo are necessary in the first place. This also fails for reasons similar to the above: land would have to be rezoned, and people wouldn't want to live next to it.
This is the part where I say "the current model is obsolete, let's find a new way".
Posts: 7,733
Threads: 686
Joined: Jun 2011
"The problem is easily solved by having the three-way light where 130 meets 11 converted to a four-way."
Since Punaweb armchair traffic planners are better than anything the state or county can muster, maybe somebody needs to forward this idea to wherever it matters. While I don't have any reason to believe it would ever seriously be considered at least somebody can say that they tried.
Posts: 2,151
Threads: 73
Joined: Mar 2007
Terracore said: "Since Punaweb armchair traffic planners are better than anything the state or county can muster . . . "
Unfortunately, that statement contains more truth than we might like. Just look at some of the state and county road projects in and around Puna, and you'll see what I mean.
Posts: 7,733
Threads: 686
Joined: Jun 2011
When I made my statement, I wasn't being facetious.
Posts: 1,930
Threads: 71
Joined: Jun 2012
That intersection is a much better one for a full two lane roundabout. Traffic lights, there are going to be serious crashes there. In this case, a full two lane roundabout makes a lot of sense, although it would cost a lot more. Just getting traffic to slow down in that stretch would be a big relief to traffic, plus allow smoother flow in and out of Shipman. This is a weird bill, one person submitting it, appropriations are just for DOT to manage it, Shipman is paying for all the permitting and contracting. It's probably not going to make it out of committee, if it gets that far.
"Aloha also means goodbye. Aloha!"
*Japanese tourist on bus through Pahoa, "Is this still America?*
