Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0528.000 1996-1998 • Sustainability Committee ~ ~ ;J~ ~ f~ it j ~ P.O. Box 6 ' Volcano, Hawaii 96785 r, September 20, 1997 COU. , Ms. Julia M. Tsumo[o and Mr. Dean Nakagawa Statewide Transportation Planning Office Department of Transportation 600 Kapiolani Boulevazd, Suite 306 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 Dear Ms. Tsumoto and Mr. Nakagawa, Thank you for arranging a meeting of the CAC for September 18, 1997. We came away with a better understanding of the process. We are sympathetic to the problems you have had with the consultant, and are cognizant of [he feelings that what we want to do is too time consuming to be accornmodated in the CAC process as presented to us. Therefore we have set up a Sustainability Committee of the CAC to carry through a planning process that we believe is necessary to satisfy ISTEA requirements and the goals that we supported in the initial meetings of the CAC. In the mean time, in order for you to complete your time schedule without precluding the options of our committee process, we ask you to add to Tables 11 and 12 according to the list at the end of this letter, and include in the Enhancements list the projects in the attached list from the Mayor's Bike/Ped Committee. According to the State of Hawaii DOT Guidelines and Procedures for Projects under the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), the Long Range Land Transportation Plan Program is meant to produce a list of projects for which State and/or Federal funding may be allotted. It is significant Chat inclusion in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program is a Federal requirement for projects to be quali£ed for funding under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 The Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) is one of three committees that are part of the Countywide Transportation Planning Process (CTPP), The role of the CAC is to advise the Policy Comrittee on community-based transportation needs and priorities. The responsibilities of the CAC are to identify transportation needs and deficiencies, assist in determining transportation priorities, and make recommendations to the Policy Committee. A number of CAC members have taken this task seriously and have attempted to contribute reasonable input, as was requested of us, The problem may have been differing interpretations of the role of CAC members. CAC members assumed they were to provide reasonable project recommendations, which would be considered and then prioritized for 1Kla nfl. mar, OCT o s ~ . Sustainability Committee Comments for DOT re Working Paper 11 9/30/97 p,2 the final draft. Available funding would naturally be a constraint that would affect the list and priority. Even though the process was meant to lead to a "final draft," it was understood by CAC members that the transportation planning process is "continuous, comprehensive and cooperative (3-C)" by design. We have two major process concerns. • Several of us are representatives of other organizations, such a Puna Community Council, Puna Traffic Safety, the Mayor's Bike/Pedestrian Advisory Committee and People's Advocacy for Trails Hawaii. The process, while including lapses of up to two years between meetings, repeatedly required members to review and respond to drafts within a week or two, even though we had made it clear that we needed time to consult with the groups we represent over at least a two month time period. We felt we had no choice but to respond on our own, putting ourselves at risk of anger from our constituents for failing to consult them. • When we did respond, often at great length and in writing, we never found that our input was reflected or even mentioned in any subsequent Working Paper. The STIP program, in which the CAC has a role, is partially governed by statutory requirements under ISTEA. "The process of developing such plans and programs shall provide for consideration of all modes of transportation, and shall be continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive to the degree appropriate, based on the complexity of the transportation problems." We have a major concern about this requirement. • While the initial goal-setting process resulted in a cleaz focus on the need to consider alternative modes, and to correlate them to both dedicated corridors, costs and land use patterns which would make those modes feasible, Working Paper Number 11 treats bike/ped and public transit as mere add-ons to corridors designed to best serve Single- Occupancy Vehicles. This is not surprising in that all the assumptions contained in the TRANPLAN analysis and the program itself are designed for SOV corridors. We dispute the contention that data generated by this analysis can credibly be used to project improvements that would encourage use of alternative modes. Modeling to determine that six more SOV lanes aze needed, and then estimating whether a bus can run profitably along with the cazs does not constitute credible mull-modal analysis. • This planning effort avoids land use issues, and community development issues. Yet today, it is generally accepted by planners that a Long Range Transportation Plan MUST consider land use issues. Highways drive land use decisions and land use decisions drive Sustainability Committee Comments for DOT re Working Paper 11 9/30/97 p.3 highway needs - they are inseparable. As consultant Bill Moore explained to the CAC on September 18, 1997 this process is really about getting to a "prioritized list of highway projects". A "prioritized list of highway projects" should not be glorified with the title of a Long Range Transportation Plan. To do so is to admit that this process has not produced a real Long Range Transportation Plan -one that seriously addresses the difficult challenges we all face, based on genuine community input as mandated by the ISTEA legislation. • The national bicycling and walking goal -DOUBLING THE BIKE/PED TRIPS, AND REDUCING THE FATALTCIES BY 10%o - should be included in the Big Island Long Range Transportation Plan (and the statewide version). • All new construction and maintanence and re-design projects (both State and County) should be in conformance with the criteria of the Bike Plan Hawaii 1994, and include "safe for shared use" design criteria. • The plan should include a commitment to Transportation Enhancement Activities, and a list ofbicycle/pedestrian projects that will approximate 10% of STP expenditures as set aside by ISTEA mandate. For other suggestions see the revised "Bicycle and Pedestrian Programs and Projects For The Big Island Of Hawaii", attached. The State's continuous transportation planning process must, at minimum, consider congestion, intereonnectivity, planning and efficiency. One minimum ISTEA requirement is for the "Preservation of rights-of-way for constmction of future transportation projects, including identification of unused rights-of-way which may be needed for future transportation corridors, and identify those corridors for which action is most needed to prevent destruction or loss." This brings us, again, to the serious problem of recognition of planned development and land/use transportation relationships of the future. We found several problems with the treatment of Puna in this respect. • Puna and other areas with substandard subdivisions were analyzed according to the Land Use designations in the County General Plan, in which these 80,000 pazcels are not recognized. This defies reason, and legal precedent, which determines what services must be provided by government by the development permits and rights granted for that area. Since in these areas -regardless of zoning, District designations or General Plan maps to the contrary -agriculture, residential, government services, commercial and industrial uses are all pemvtted by the County of Hawaii, these aze the uses for which transportation infrastructure must be anticipated. How could an analysis based on a potential population of less than 40,000 anticipate future needed corridors for the 250,000 or so people for whom development rights have already been granted? It is unfair to the people investing in these subdivisions to not make a good faith effort to anticipate, at least, the modes and Sustainabiliry Committee Comments for DOT rc Working Paper 11 9/30/97 p.4 corridors needed for existing buildable lots. • Puna is, for all intents and purposes the poorest community of any size in Hawaii. Car ownership as a requirement of employment places a great hardship on its residents, in fact preventing many from being able to work. The evaluation criteria used in your analyses had no factors to take into account this issue of social costs, which is probably the primary determinant of cost and quality of life for Puna residents. • This failure to recognize and anticipate permitted development in existing lots, and the social and economic realities of Puria makes it impossible for this process to carry out the mandate to identify future transportation needs, and therefore to judge more shots term strategies in relaCion to future needs, or our long tetra goals for sustainable transportation. We are currently at a stage in the process where the CAC will prioritize projects for the final draft. "The STIP program is to include a project, or an identified phase of a project, only if full funding can reasonably be anticipated to be available for such project within the time period contemplated for completion of the project. The program shall also reflect the priorities for programming and expenditures of funds, including transportation enhancements, required by ISTEA." • The wish list (Table I1 and Table 12) which was "cherry-picked" from the Alternatives 1 - 6, and which bears little, if any resemblance to any of the individual alternatives studied has a high price tag, i.e., Islandwide Circulation 1,046,000,000 Hilo Circulation 139,200,000 Kailua-Kona Circulation 257,000,000 Short Term Hwy Upgrades 400,700,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURE: $2,842,900,000 Approximately $3 Billion! When spread over the entire 22 yeaz life of the Long Range Plan (1998 - 2020), this is $129,222,727 per yeaz. To expect to generate or receive over $129,000,00 per year for the County of Hawaii highways system is unrealistic -this is more than is spent throughout the entire State per yeaz. We don't know how much is spent per yeaz for the County of Hawaii highways. However, the annual total of federal money allocated to the State of Hawaii for highways in STP funding is about $60,000,000 per year. Over the last couple of years there have been specific additional funding categories for Oahu that have increased total statewide highway expenditures to about $12Q000,000 per year -this funding may not be sustainable. The main value of Working Paper 11 and the process that produced it, may be that it highlights tremendous projected congestion deficiencies by the year 2020, based on present SOV demand, and tells us that we can "solve" this problem by building additional-lanes but at tremendous cost. Knowing this is Sustainability Committee Comments for DOT re Working Paper 11 9/30/97 p,9 what is sending the Sustainability Committee back to the drawing board to look for more sensible land-use planning, small community development, and more affordable transportation alternatives. • According to Working Paper 11, analysis of the models found no significant difference in cost or effectiveness between the various SOV models compared. From where then did the lists of projects come? Since these choices obviously Gave huge costs and/or benefits for residents and landowners, the objective criteria for choosing among projects must be very clear, to avoid political as well as modal favoritism. It is cheaper, for instance, to develop a new two-lane road in an undeveloped area than to add lanes to an existing ROW lined on both sides by existing residential or higher rises. To merely deem a project "feasible or not feasible" by a subjective evaluation ignores this huge, and at least estimable, cost difference. It also ignores the trip distance savings from providing more direct routes and better transit accessibility, through gridding as opposed to "pod" design. • The State Transportation Plan (STP) list is gatekeeper to the five-yeaz STIP. We are convinced that the current process, and TRANPLAN modeling, given the shortcomings described above, are more likely to hinder than advance our goals. In order to be able to carry out a more in depth and productive committee process and still allow you to meet your short term deadlines, the following needs to be included in the STP Tables 11 and 12. • We understand that a circulation study of Puna was inadvertently left out of Working Paper 11. We not only support such a study, under State Planning and Research (SPR) funding program, but insist that it be based on existing development rights with comparison of various land use /transportation scenarios, including dedicated bike/ped and public transit modes and land use. The Sustainability Committee will direct this study for compliance with the ISTEA mandated planning criteria and goals for intetmtxlalism and Sustainability. • All of the possible corridors that we could anticipate, that may be considered in that circulation study, so that the results of that study, and the priorities that follow, aze not blocked from STIP listing. Therefore, in addition to the study described above, the following changes and additions to improvement projects are needed. • C3 Komohana Street Extension: Leimano Street to Pahoa. New two lane highway or dedicated bike/ped/transit route, with separate turning lanes at major intersections, with interconnections to all collector roads in Hawaiian Acres, Orchid band and Ainaloa subdivisions. • C4 North and South Kulani Road: Puainako Extension to the south boundary of Hawaiian/Fern Acres. Reconstmct existing two lane roadway and extend new sections on both ends to current design and safety standards. • S 12 Stainback Highway: Intersection with Highway 148 above Volcano to Sustainability Committee Comments for DOT re Working Paper 11 9/30/97 p.6 Hawaii Belt Road. Reconstruct existing two lane roadway and extend new sections on mauka end to current design and safety standards. • CS Railroad Avenue: Hilo/Puna Boundary to Opihikao. Reopen historic ROW to dedicated bike/ped/public transit route. • 15th Street: HilolPuna Boundary to Highway 132 (road to Kapoho). New two-lane roadway to follow alignment of 15th Street in Hawaiian Paradise Park and extend in both directions to tie in subdivisions of Hawaiian Shores, Hawaiian Beaches and north edge of Nanawale. • Old Puna Road. Hilo Bay to Kalapana. /mprove historic alignment to provide dedicated bikelped route, shared use in some areas, to current design and safety standards. • Central Subdivision Corridor: Old Puna Road to Hawaii Belt Road. New two lane roadway, following Paradise Drive, E Road, Kalaponi, Lehuapele alignment, for all modes or limited to bikelpedltransit, alignment designed to anticipate potential for future rail dedication. • Volcano Trail: Kilauea Summit to O[d Puna Road at Keaau Beach. Dedicated bike/ped corridor to current standards, maintaining potential for future transit use. • Highway 148 (Wright Road extension) : Hawaii Belt Road to Saddle Road. Reconstruct and extend existing two-lane road to meet current standards. • Kipimana Extension: 15th Extension to Komohana Extension. Reconstruct and extend existing two-lane roadway to meet current standards. • Waipahoehoe Road: Kekuamakakii Extension (in Orehidland or Hawaiian Acres) to 15th Extenuion. New two lane roadway built to current standards. • Ka'apuni Trail. Circle Island at mid elevation. This includes Old Walua Road phases one and two, Kailua to Kawaihae, now in planning, and Railroad, mentioned above, from Hilo to Opihikao. Segments to be added. For the Hilo circulation, refer to the prioritized list in the "Bicycle and Pedestrian Programs and Projects for the Big Island of Hawaii", attached. Sincerely, t Roger Evans and John Luchau, Hawaiian Para?Iise P Bonnie Goodell, planner ~ ~,ti-(, Kristine Kubat, Clean Running Jon Olson, Puna Community Council Ron Reilly, Mayor's Bike/Pedestrian Committee, People Advocating for Trails Hawaii David Taylor, President of Puna Community Council and Puna Traffic Safety Sust<~inability Committee Comments (or DOT re Working Paper 11 9/30/97 p.7 Keith Wallis, E Mau Na Ala Hele, Waimea Trails and Greenways Committee David Skaife, Mayor's Bike/Ped Advisory Committee (verbal concurrence via email or fax review) CC: Barbaza Braswell, Federal Highway Administration Governor Ben Cayetano Charles Toguchi, Governor's Office Doug Mellor, Department of Transportation Stanley Tamura, Acting District Engineer, DOT Mike Medeiros, State Bicycle Coordinator Virginia Goldstein, County Plannning Dvector Donna Kiyosaki, Chief Engineer, County of Hawaii Hawaii County Council members Tom Brown, Hawaii County Transit Coordinator P.S. Regazding Table 11 The map pertaining to No. C3 dces not agree with the text. The map indicates a connection to the Keaau Bypass and the text indicates a connection at Hawaiian Acres. Although projects are included that will benefit Puna, a major portion of Puna circulation and intereonnective deficiencies are not addressed in Table 11. A "project" that would be a "Planning study for the Puna Circulation Area" is still a significant and reasonable request to be included on the list. Puna Circulation Alt 2, Page 14, lists Kapoho Beach Road only. Map on page 16 shows Komohana extension as well. Which one was evaluated? Regazding No. S7, consider "reconstruct existing two lane highway to provide geometric design, intersection and safety improvements, with fuming lanes at major intersections" instead of "widen from two lanes to four lanes." Regazding Table 12 Consideration for Hilo and Kailua-Kona "Circulation Areas" are mention. Puna and Waimea Circulation Areas would also be rationally considered. l i / 1' ~ ^ i r 'mot -"-"t~~ •~'c~ 748:Wrlght Road to Saddle: . oef , re./~~~ ~F . _j~~{ -jam ~ of ~d'~ ~ ! ~+x T`ry ~ J'~MPROVEEXISTING a ~ , r ALIGNMENT EXTEND NEW } ~ ~ f / RU ~ CONNECTION • f~"~ • f 1 I~~.~ _ ! ~ DEDICATED • ~ _ BIKE/PED . r t f f 1 / ~ Kulani ! ~ ~ , ~ Possible Ahgntpents fnr ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ t $bmohana Extension.. ~ b ~ , , V .^1 F ~ ask ~ ;~y~in3 ~ ^ ~f~+! i •L Y~' ;yi 'N~ 4 ~~ISth ~ Y.~ b _ ~ QI~FuhB Road, d,~ .I: f" r H Community of Hawaiian Paradise Park input to the Citizen's Advisory Committee biitial future planning for our subdivision included feeder roads into Hilo. The main artery (2 lane, 35 mph strictly enforced) was designated as 15th Avenue because it is central, touches on planned public service, light indushial, recreation areas and is the least inhabited of all the cross roads in Hawaiian Paradise Park. If ISth Avenue were to connect with Hawaiian Beaches and Hawaiian Shores it would cross State of Hawaii lands located between HPP and Hawaiian Beaches. The link of Hawaiian Beaches and Hawaiian Shores at this particular area (15 Ave) would provide an opportunity for those communities to use the planned (Hawaiian Paradise Park Community Master Plan of March 1997) civic services, park and recreational facilities to be located on 15th and 16th Avenues without having to bike or drive an extra 10-15 miles in another direction in order to get there. The next best alternative would be a 2 lane roadway, 35mph (strictly enforced) at 5th which would touch on lands set aside for a High School at the Maku'u side and a Village Center on the Kaloli side. Our intention is to use Railroad Avenue as an exclusive Pedestrian/Bike/Electric Vehicle Path within Hawaiian Paradise Park where access to private property permits. Our conununity supports the development of Railroad Avenue into Pedestrian/Bike/Electric Vehicle Path within Hawaiian Paradise Park and a Public Transportation Corridor from Hilo to Kapoho. The following text is quoted from the Hawaiian Paradise Park Community Master Plan dated March 1997: Transportation S,, stem "A transportation system consisting of a shuttle service connecting the village centers, light industrial areas and recreation areas. This is diagrammed on map 3 in the attached maps. That route should be thought of as a prelude to what could be accomplished with a permanent transportation system throughout Paradise Park and connecting with the other connnunities including Hilo." o\ _ Pedestrian Walkways and Bike Paths/Trails "Pedestrian walkways and bicycle paths are key to keeping automobiles in the garage/carport and off the road when an easy walk or bike ride can get a person to essential services. The perimeter of Paradise Park and Railroad Avenue are the only mapped out areas that we have dedicated to pedestrian walkways and bicycle paths. Key to land use here is to keep people in Paradise Park from having to drive elsewhere to buy things that could very well be provided within its boundaries. The current plan drawing does not include all bicycle trails and pedestrian walkways only because at this time there is no easement rights over individual properties to connect any of the village centers with roads running parallel to the avenues on the drawing. The concept of bicycle paths and pedestrian walkways remains integral to this plan so that residents may walk or bike to and from services within a few minutes. We have pictured major trails on Railroad Avenue and on the borders of the subdivision. It is intended that Railroad Avenue become limited to bicycles, pedestrians and electric vehicles." Bicycle Paths/Pedestrian Walkways As is apparent, the Community of Hawaiian Paradise Park supports the concept of exclusive bicycle paths and pedestrian walkways in order to get more cars off roads. This concept could be easily applied to existing State of Hawaii rights of way and roads now crossing their lands. Two particular areas come to mind. 1. The first is what is now called Government Beach Road in Hawaiian Paradise Park. This old roadway starting at the Hilo Airport, if developed properly, could bring enormous economic opportunity to eco-tourism, not only in Puna but to Hilo, as the jump off point as well. This is a public right of way that could be developed now and very well should be. The Hawaiian Paradise Park Community Master Plan of March 1997 sets aside 40 acres of property at 5th Avenue for the building of a 1 figh School. This is just one-half mile from the old Puna Roadway (Govenument Beach Road) and could link the many students who would attend this High School from Hawaiian Beaches and Hawaiian Shores with a five mile bicycle alternative route rather than the 20 miles of driving needed to do this trip via existing congested roads. 2. The second is Railroad Avenue between the subdivisions of Hawaiian Paradise Park and Hawaiian Beaches. This crosses State of Hawaii controlled lands, is an existing road although it is blocked off and littered with junked automobiles. The Hawaiian Paradise Park Community Master Plan of March 1997 sets aside 71 acres of lands for civic activities such as Public Libraries and Satellite City Hall and a large Park. This would be located one-quarter mile from Railroad Avenue within Hawaiian Paradise Park. A Bicycle Path/Pedestrian Walkway along this route would link Hawaiian Beaches and Hawaiian Shores with these civic activities via a scenic 5 mile nearly level alternative to a 10-15 mile drive on existing congested roadways. This also could be done now at a lower cost than in the future. Our community supports roadway links with other communities and Hilo. We welcome alternative routes to Hilo. We do not support major highways through our subdivision but welcome a 2 lane 35 mph (strictly enforced) alternative roadway at 15th Avenue or Sth Avenue. We support Bicycle Paths/Pedestrian Walkways/Public Transportation Corridor on Railroad Avenue and at Government Beach Road. Submitted by: John M. Luchau Hawaiian Paradise Park BICYCLE AND P>;DESTRIAN PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS FOR THE BIG ISLAND OF HAWAII PREPARED by Mayor Yamashiro's Advisory Committee on Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety. Revision Date: 9/30/97. Comments welcome, contact: Chair: Ron Reilly, PO Box 458 Volcano HI 96785, (808) 967-8603 fax (808) 985-8516, rreilly@interpac.net A NATIONAL AND LOCAL TRANSPORTATION GOAL "To double the current percentage of trips taken by bicycling or walking; and to simultaneously reduce by 10% the number of bicyclists and pedestrians killed or injured in traffic crashes."* ' The Federal I-Iighway Administration has established this national goal, and suggests that it is in the national interest for communities nationwide to also voluntarily adopt this goal. For a full discussion refer to `The National Bicycling and Walking Study - Transportation Choices for a Changing America" (Publication No. FHWA-PD-94-023). This goal is consistent with new federal funding options outlined in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) 1991, which suggests that it is in the national interest to develop a broad range of transportation al[ematives with less dependence on motor vehicles especially single occupancy motor vehicles. ACTION ITEMS FOR LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION NOTE: The five broad areas that follow are defined by the National Bicycling and Walking Study as appropriate local community Action Items. The Mayoral Advisory Committee warmly congratulates govemment departments and individuals who have implemented. or have taken siani5cant steps toward implementation of maov of the followin>= Actions Items -these items are underlined in the followtna list. ACTION ITEM 1• ORGANIZE AND COORDINATE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PROGRAMS I.a Appoint a state bicvcle/uedestrian coordinator (required by ISTEA 1991) l.b Appoint a bicvcle/oedestrian advisory committee (established by Mayor Yamashiro September 1993) l.c Appoint a county bicycle/pedestrian coordinator, or assign coordination duties to an existing county position or individual. ACTION ITEM 2: PLAN AND CONSTRUCT NEEDED FACILTTIES (please see Big Island Bike/Ped Facilities List for specific bicycle and pedestrian projects islandwide) 2.a Provision of road space to safely accommodate bicyclists and motorists side-by-side in the form of wide curb lanes. caved shoulders, and bicycle lanes. page 2 ACTION ITEM 2: (continued) PLAN AND CONSTRUCT NEEDED FACILITIES 2.b Provision of pedestrian malls, sidewalks, curb cuts (Americans with Disabilities Act), and caved shoulders for pedestrian use. 2.c Provision for multi-use trails and bicvcle/pedestrian oaths for non-motorized users as an extension of the highway system (see sepazate list of projects). 2.d Preservation of state and county owned "old government roads", railroad corridors, and former sugaz cane roads for use as multi-use trails, bicycle and pedestrian paths, and non-motorized transportation corridors and lineaz parks. 2.e Provision for bicvcle racks for temoorarv narking, and bicycle lockers for long term parking and showers at the work place. 2.f Preservation of ancient and historic walkin¢ trails providing mountain and beach access. 2.g Provision for mixed-use zones and wmpact land use development planning (such as the pedestrian scale communities outlined in the Puna Communiri Development Plan and other local plans such as Volcano Vision 2020 etc.) 2.h Provision for bicycle/oedestrian oaths ~lon¢ eaistin¢ utiliri comdors and in new developments. 2.i Reduce county and state liability by assuring that all reconstruction and resurfacing projects on routes identified in the current county and state bicycle plans conform to the American Association of State Highway Officials (ASSHTO) recommendations for bicycle facilities. 2.j Update the County of Hawaii Bikeway Plan (1979). 2.k Develop an island wide network of camping pazks that have on-site resident managers, and that offer a safe secure and enjoyable experience. They should be appropriately spaced for visiting and local bicycle tourists i.e. 20 - 50 miles apart and within 2 - 5 miles of major visitor destinations. 2.l Provision of resident caretaker/host families for Big Island beach parks in cooperation with the local Hawaiian community, following the model of Malaekahana on Oahu. (The Hawaii Ecotourism Association has made this a top priority). 2.m Provision for improved security at beach pazk camping areas, including personal safety of campers, and bicycle lockers for equipment security. 2.n Maintenance program that identifies and corrects specific bicycle and pedestrian road hazards. page 3 ACTION ITEM 2: (continued) PLAN AND CONSTRUCT NEEDED FACILITIES 2.o Provision for an island wide bicycle and pedestrian traffic count and usage survey and periodic future monitoring. 2.p Establishment of bicycle and pedestrian accident reporting and evaluation (at present newspaper reports are the only source of current information). 2.q Require golf course developers to provide multi-use perimeter trails as part of the community benefit assessment (international golfer Gary Player is a proponent of this idea which has been very successfully implemented on mainland golf courses). ACTION ITEM 3: PROMOTE BICYCLING AND WALKING 3.a Bicycle route road mannin¢ and off road trails mapping, completed in 1996 (a county contract with the Big Island Mountain Bike Association). Available at bike shops, and on the net at http://www.interoac.netl--mtbike 3.b Provision for continued bicycle and pedestrian related technical conferences and workshops by the University of Hawaii, Office of Technology Transfer, for transportation professionals and community advocates. 3.c Provide for bicycle access on the Hele On Bus, and expand bus carrying capacity as needed with bicycle racks. All Hele-On buses allow bicycle carrying for additional fee. 3.d Provision for public information and awareness via brochures and Internet "home pages" and a-mail news groups: i. e., hawaiiCa,cvclina.ore (statewide newsgroup), httn://www.hialoha.com/path (PATH web page with quarterly newsletter), htto://www.interoac.net/ mtbike (Big Island Mountain Bike web page) A HawaiiBicycling League is under construction 3.e Bicycle and walk to work week/day, including employer incentives for bicycling and walking. 3.f Provision for a fleet of county owned bicycles for free public use in Hilo (current Council Chair, Jimmy Arakaki has expressed interest in this idea). 3.g Bike and walk to school feasibility studies for Big Island schools, and where possible eliminate school administrative rules that prohibit bicycling to school. 3.h Support legislation that encourages bicycling and walking and oppose legislation that discourages bicycling and walking. Coordinate and prioritize legislative initiatives statewide. (please see Legislative Initiatives list for suggested items) page 4 ACTION ITEM 4: EDUCATE BICYCLISTS, PEDESTRIANS AND THE PUBLIC 4.a Provision of age appropriate bicycle and pedestrian education in schools, (current county and state fundine for PATH (Peoples Advocacv for Trails Hawaiil to provide Big Island Bike Ed and Bike Walk Alert nroaramsl. 4.b Provision for a bicycle and pedestrian component in the Judiciary Department Drivers Improvement Course, and the removal ofanti-bicyclist bias. 4.c Provision for abicycle/pedestrian component in the high school Drivers Education courses. 4.d Provision for adult bicyclist on road instruction through the national Effective Cvclina aroaram sponsored by PATH (Peoples Advocacv for Trials Hawaiil 4.e Provision for mountain bicvcline instruction at the University of Hawaii Hilo Campus (currently offered by Professor Michael Tanabe at UH-Hilo) 4.f Revision of the Drivers Handbook and the Drivers Test to improve the bicyclist and pedestrian component. ACTION ITEM 5: ENFORCE LAWS AND REGULATIONS S.a Police citin¢ of bicvclist and pedestrian violations, as well as infractions of motor vehicle operators relative to bicyclists and pedestrians 5.6 County and Police enforcement of bicycle registration requirements for individuals, and compliance by all bicycle retailers selling new bicycles. S.c Provision for a police bicycle patrol detail. S.e Continuing education of police officers to remove anti-bicyclist bias in police reporting of bicycle accidents and in bicycle accident reconstruction and analysis. S.f Encourage the Prosecutors Office and the Judiciary Department to maintain fairness and impartiality in administration of equal justice under the law for all road users including bicyclists and pedestrians. page 5 BIG ISLAND BIKE/PED FACILITIES LIST 1. "Kaaouni `O Hawaii" Trail - 250 mile, circle island, otT-road Bike/Pedestrian Trail With the support of Big Island communities, the private sector, and state and county government this bold initiative will be a wonderful asset for the Big Island. The first steps of the project are well on their way to becoming a reality: a) PATH has been recommended for approval to received a CBED $15,000 grant to develop a business plan for the project, and, b) PATH's goal is have the first 10 mile of trail open and paved during 1997. This will be on the existing HELCO utility right-of--way between Kailua- Kona and Kawaihae . 2. Hilo on road oroiects NOTE: Advisory Committee members have reviewed the on-road bicycle projects identified but not prioritized in the State Bike Plan Hawaii 1994. We have prioritized the following top ten projects as having the best benefit to Hilo bicyclists (see Hawaii Bike Plan 1994, appendix 5~, pages I - 9). Priority Project No. Project Name and location 1. 1. Kalanianaole Avenue (inters. Kam Ave. to I.eileiwi Beach Park 2. 18. Kamehameha Avenue (inters. Kal. Ave. to Bayfront Hwy.) 3. 29A Kilauea Avenue (inters. Ponahawal St. to Haihai St.) 4. 23 Pualnako St. (inters. Komohana St. to Kanoelehua Ave.) 5. 9 Kekuanaoa St. (inters. Airport Road to Kilauea Ave.) 6. 21 Kinoole St. (inters. Halhai to Ponahawai St.) 7. 13 Mohouli St. (inters. Kilauea Ave. to Komohana St.) 8. 10 Kilauea Avenue (inters. Kawili St. to Aupuni St.) 9. 18A Haihai St. (inters. Ainaloa Dr. to Kinoole St.) 10. 20 Kawailani St. (inters. Komohana St. to Kinoole St.) 3. Hilo off road oroiects Use of various drainage canals as bicycle/pedestrian paths and linear parks supported by County Council Resolutions i.e., Resolution #183-95 for a Trails System in Hilo 3.a Follow the Waiakea Steam from its confluence with Wailoa Ponds, through the University of Hawaii at Hilo (LJIIII) campus, up to the intersection with Kawailani Street. page 6 BIG ISLAND BIKE/PED FACILITIES LIST (continued) 3.6 Follow the Alenaio Stream Channel form approximately Alahelenui Street to Bayfront. This would link Kaumana residential azea with downtown Hilo. 4. Puna ofl road oroiects Supported by County Council Resolutions i.e., Resolution #184-95 for a Trails System in Puna. 4.a Old Puna Road Trail multiuse bicycle/pedestrian path: Phase One: Hawaiian Pazadise Pazk to Hilo Airport Phase Two: Hawaiian Paradise Park to Hawaiian Beaches 4.b Railroad Avenue: Kapoho to Hilo as a paved multi-use bicycle/pedestrian path (possible future use also as a single traffic lane for exclusive Hele-On Bus use, and emergency evacuation). Phase One: Hawaiian Pazadise Park to Hilo Phase Two: Hawaiian Paradise pazk to Kapoho 4.c The Volcano Trail from Kea'au to Volcano following the un-used county owned right-of--way. 4.d Volcano Village bike/ped routes, e.g., Mauna Loa Estates to Thurston Lava Tube, and a mauka alignment parallel to Hwy 11 connecting Volcano Village with the Golf Course subdivision 4.d Various other mauka-makai and coastal trails and Old Government Roads that have been identified, e.g., the Kea'au to Ha'ena Beach Road, the coastal route from Richazdsons Beach -Kings Landing - Ha'eana Beach. (Note: legal action involving public access issues is currently pending before the Hawaii Supreme Court). 5. Ka'u off road nroiects Preservation of Ka'u Agribusiness sugar cane roads as multi-use bicycle/pedestrian paths. 6. Hamakua on road nroiects Upgrade shoulders on the belt road, and where cost effective retrofit shoulderless bridges with bicycle pedestrian additions. 7. Hamakua off road urojects Preserve former Hamakua sugar cane roads as multi-use bicycle/pedestrian paths and recreational corridors. A proposal made at the recent Hamakua Coast Scenic byways conference. page 7 BIG ISLAND BIKE/PED FACILITIES LIST (continued) 8. Kailua-Kona on road 8.a Resurfacing ofAlii Drive to include six foot well Waved shoulders is a project that is soon to be implemented 8.b Resurfacing of shoulders on state roads along the entire length of the IronMan route. The section from Keahole to Waikaloa is soon to be imnlemented. 8.c Upgrading of shoulders on the belt road in south Kona from Honalu southward to connect with the completed shoulder work at mile post 89 (the Milolii turn-ofl). 8.d Upgrading of shoulders on Palani Road mauka ofthe Queen K. Hwy. 9. Kailua-Kona oft road oroiects 9.a Walua Road multi-use bicycle/pedestrian path: Phase One: completion Lako St. to Akoni St. (including Kamalumalu Gulch) Phase Two: mauai of Hwy 11 to connect with Kuakini and AGi Drive 9.6 Development of the Judd Trail as a multi-use bicycle/pedestrian trail. 9.c Development of forestry roads on state land in Puu Anahulu as a mountain bicycling recreation area. 9.d Development of the old sections of the Mamalahoa Hwy as multi-use bicycle/pedestrian trails. 9.e Old Government Road Keahou Bay to Kealakekua Bay Phase One: Keahou Bay to Kealakekua Bay Phase Two: mauka access to Hwy 11 at Captain Cook 9.f Development of coastal mulit-use bicycle/pedestrian paths that parallel the Queen Kaahumanu Hwy and connect coastal resorts and regional parks. 10. Waimea on road oroiects 10.a Shoulders on county portions of the Mamalahoa Hwy between Waimea town and the Waimea Airport (to conform to the state owned portions). 10.6 Shoulders on the Kawaihae Hwy between Hawaii Preparatory Academy and Waimea town. 10.c Provision for bicycle lanes on Mamalahoa Highway within Waimea town. Currently pending mulit-lane improvements within Waimea do not include bike lanes. It is hoped that upon completion of the Waimea Bypass this bike lane deficiency will be corrected. page 8 11. Waimea olTroad oroiects Waimea Trails and Greenwavs linear corridor,project which has received ISTEA funding for planning and design phases. The route generally follows the alignment of the Walkaloa Stream. It would begin in the vicinity of Church Row and extend initially to Opelu Road. A second phase would link the residential azeas near the Kohala Mtn. Rd. - Kawaihae Road intersection and Hawaii Preparatory Academy. A third phase would extend from Church Row to the vicinity of mud lane and link the Lakeland subdivision to the trail system. LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES 1. Provision for on-going state funding of statewide bicycle education programs e.g., the current "BikeEd" programs offered on Oahu by the Hawaii bicycle League and on the Big Island by PATH. 2. Provision allowing bicyclists to legally ride on the shoulders of roads as legal road vehicles. Current law prohibits road vehicles from driving on shoulders except for emergency use. The law is silent regarding bicycfist's use of shoulders. Bicyclists aze defined, along with motor vehicles, as legal road vehicles. 3. Provision for bicyclists to signal a right turn by extending the right arm horizontally in the direction of the turn. 4. Elimination of requirement for bicyclist to use bicycle paths when provided instead of the adjacent roads. 5. Specific provision requiring motor vehicles to maintain a safe clearance distance when overtaking bicyclists or slow to bicyclist speed while waiting for conditions that allow for overtaking bicyclists with safe clearance.