My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2007-01-05 tginger
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2007
>
2007-01-05 tginger
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2011 8:43:04 AM
Creation date
6/13/2011 8:42:59 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
39
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
SIRACUSA: But if they’re allowing traffic to turn into the Puainako entry, then that <br />will also cross the line of traffic. <br />HAYASHI: No, as far as -. <br />SIRACUSA: If they’re coming down say from Kilauea. <br />HAYASHI: As far as Kilauea they would not be able to turn in at this particular <br />driveway. <br />SIRACUSA: But they will be able to turn in at Kekela? <br />HAYASHI: That is correct, yes. And the reason why we don’t have any conditions <br />preventing a left turn into Kekela as well as from Kekela onto Puainako is that there are many <br />residents in the area that are currently utilizing that particular intersection. So I think for this <br />purpose, we’re basically stating that they would have to comply with DOT requirements as far as <br />any improvements. <br />SIRACUSA: See the reason I’m very concerned about this though is yesterday I was <br />right there, I was coming down from the highway, and I turned right at the Ginger Patch so that I <br />could make a left into the KTA complex; and at the same time there was a bunch of traffic <br />coming down from Kilauea and they were all jockeying for different lanes so that when they got <br />to the light this one could turn left, and that one could go right, and the other could go straight; <br />and, of course, none of them were signaling. So it was a really dangerous situation. I sat there <br />not knowing what to do until, you know, they had passed, and the cars behind me were getting <br />angry. And so I said, my God, if we had some more lane turns crossing into traffic when people <br />are still trying to jockey for lanes before they get to the light and the line becomes solid, I can see <br />it as a real nightmare. And I don’t see that the comments from the Police or the Transportation <br />Departments really addressing that concern; and to me it’s a nightmare right now. <br />HAYASHI: Yes. We’re aware of that situation at that particular junction. However, I <br />think the condition that we’re recommending that they comply with any improvements the <br />Department of Transportation would require, that may also include provision of additional lanes <br />by the Department of Transportation. At this point in time, I’m not too sure as to that’s what <br />they want. But they would have to comply with any kind of improvement requirements that <br />DOT would impose upon them when they come in for approval. <br />SIRACUSA: My big concern at this point is that it was the Department of <br />Transportation that approved that nightmare situation in the first place. I don’t have a lot of faith <br />in them. <br />GRAHAM: Commissioner Alameda? <br />ALAMEDA: Yeah, I have a question about the traffic impact analysis report and DOT’s <br />involvement. Norman, so what can DOT tell us that we don’t already know in that particular <br /> EXHIBIT B 4 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.