HomeMy WebLinkAboutREP PWC 064 09/20/1971 1969-1972 410
PUBLIC WORKS .
COMMITTEE REPORT
REPORT NO 64
•
•
Councilmen
County of Hawaii
Hilo, Hawaii
The following are the recommendations of the Public Works Committee which
were considered at its meeting of September 20, 1971:
/Le. Couuit. 1036.4: SPEED LIMITS - HAWAII BELT ROAD (HONOKAA)
From Chas. L. Schuster, District Engineer, State Dept. of
Transportation, proposing revisions to the Traffic Code to
establish a 55 mph speed limit at Plumeria Road and Mamane
Street and a 45 mph speed limit at Lehua Street:
1) Amend Ordinance No. 39, Section 10-5(e) 23 to read: •
"Hawaii Belt Road, from a point 800 feet west to
a point 1200 feet east of intersection of Lehua
Street with the Hawaii Belt Road."
2) Amend Ordinance No. 39, Section 10-5(i) 1 to read:
"Hawaii Belt Road, from Paauilo to a point 700
feet east of the intersection of the Honokaa
Access Road (FASP S-238(1) ) with the Hawaii
Belt Road."
Concur with the revisions to the
Traffic Code and refer to Corporation
Counsel to prepare the proper
amendment.
Comm. 1183.1: ROAD DEDICATION
KONA HIGHLANDS, SECTION"B"
From Corporation Counsel, dated Sept. 3, 1971, transmitting for
acceptance, the road dedication deed for the subject matter.
The Public Works Department has recommended acceptance.
• Accept .road' dedication deed.
Report No. 6• Z
File No. PWtkl-
ADOPTED: September 22, 1971 M. B. No. • /3/4
Date: SEP 2 1971
Oil
PWC-64 - 2 - September 20, 1971
Comm. 1510: C. BREWER & COMPANY - SIGN VARIANCE REQUEST
From C. Walters, Warehouse Supt. , C. Brewer & Co. , Ltd. , requesting
that a sign variance be granted for the purpose of mounting one
2-2' x 5' sign on the chain link fence fronting Kalanianaole Avenue
in front of their warehouse located at 888 Kalanianaole Avenue.
This second sign would be 363 feet from their 2-3/4' x 8' sign
already mounted on the fence adjacent to the truck entrance at the
Keaukaha end of the property.
1510.1: From Planning Director dated Sept. 8, 1971, informing that they
have submitted their recommendations regarding the above matter to
the Department of Public Works. They have recommended that the
subject sign variance be denied as the granting of a variance would
be inconsistent with the intent of the section of the sign ordinance
which allows one ground sign not exceeding 32 sq. ft. in area.
,,5_, C.. -1510.2: From Chief Engineer dated Sept. 13, 1971, recommending that the
request for a second sign be denied.
Accept the recommendations of Chief
Engineer and Planning Director and
deny the request.
Comm. 1561: SEPTIC TANKS - REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION
From R. E. Allison, dated Aug. 12, 1971, recommending that because
of the rapid increase in population of this county and the concern
about pollution, now would be the time to require septic tanks for
all new construction. A limitation might be included for this
requirement to cover only those areas with more than one house
per acre and where sewer lines will not be available in the fore-
seeable future. The Board of Water Supply should make recommenda-
tions on the limitations.
1561.1: From Chief Engineer dated Sept. 9, 1971, reporting on the above
communication. Recommends that cesspools be permitted where
underground formations are suitable and they meet Chapter 38 of
the Public Health Regulations of the Department of Health require-
ments. The Department of Health determines the types of private
disposals which are allowable for a given area or locality and is
the enforcing agency.
1561.2: 'From Manager, Dept. of Water Supply, dated Sept. 9, 1971, informing
that while Mr. Allison's suggestion of using septic tanks has
certain advantages, they feel that this is not the answer since
this type of treatment does not kill the pathogenic organisms.
411
411
PWC-64 -3- September 20, 1971
Comm. 1561.3: From District Health Officer, State Dept. of Health, dated Sept. 7,
1971, informing that they recognize and accept the use of a septic
tank as one method of private sewage disposal system. In areas
where they believe the location and construction of a sewage
disposal system may contaminate potable ground water, shore waters,
bathing beaches, streams and other surface water, a sewer system or
an approved type of sewage treatment unit is called for.
c. C- 1561.4: From Planning Director dated Sept. 14, 1971, informing that
presently private sewage disposal systems are regulated by the
Dept. of Health and the proposed revised General Plan recognizes
the problem of cesspools.
Receive and file and request the Clerk
to send copies of Comm. 1561.1, .2, ..3 and
.4 to the writer of the communication.
Comm. 1564: MOTORCYCLE MUFFLERS
From Council Chairman dated Aug. 17, 1971, transmitting for
information and disposition, a letter requesting the enactment
or enforcement of an ordinance to require motorcycle mufflers to
reduce noise.
1564.1: From Assistant Corporation Counsel dated Aug. 31, 1971, informing
that the subject matter is covered under Section 20-36 of
Ordinance 39.
Receive and file.
Comm. 1565: REVISION OF SPEED LIMITS ON KAMEHAMEHA & KILAUEA AVENUES
From Chief Engineer dated Aug. 17, 1971, transmitting a report
for revision of speed limits on Kamehameha and Kilauea Avenues,
and requesting that Section 10-5 of Ordinance No. 39 be amended
as stated in Section III of the report.
-cc, C- 1565.1: From Philip D. Hooton, Chairman, Highway Safety Council, dated
Sept. 16, 1971, informing that they support and concur with the
recommendations of the Chief Engineer regarding the revision to
the speed limits on both streets.
Approve the request and refer to
Corporation Counsel to prepare the
proper amendment.
Comm. 1569: REQUEST FOR SIGN VARIANCE
PAN AMERICAN FINANCIAL CORPORATION
From Chief Engineer dated Aug. 18, 1971, recommending that the
request for variance be denied. Copy of Planning Department's
recommendations attached.
Accept the recommendation of the
Chief Engineer and deny the request.
i •
PWC-64 - 4 - September 20, 1971
-c.- Comm. 1586: VOLCANO ROAD, 29 MILE POST TO 26 MILE POST
PROJECT NO. F-011-2(4)
From Council Chairman dated Sept. 1, 1971, transmitting for
information a copy of a letter from Mr. Chas. L. Schuster,
District Engineer of the Dept. of Transportation, to the Chief
Engineer.
County participate under alternative No. 2.
{ S L e_1506.I/aiLe-7I,
Comm. 1589: SPEED BUMPS
From Philip D. Hooton, Chairman, Highway Safety Council, dated
Aug. 24, 1971, transmitting for information a resolution adopted
at their August 10 meeting opposing the construction of anti-
speed bumps.
Receive and file.
Comm. 1593: COST TO INSTALL ALL UTILITY LINES UNDERGROUND
AT HONOLII BEACH PARK (Rec. 5/PWC-62)
From Chief Engineer dated Sept. 1, 1971, informing that the cost
to place the remaining overhead portion of utility lines to the
Honolii Park pavilion underground is $3,450.00.
Receive and file.
(Opposed: Mr. Souza)
Comm. 1604: SEWER. IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT - PUUEO ( ec. 4/PWC-62)
From Chief Engineer dated Sept. 13, 1971, submitting a report on
the above recouuiiendation. . Based on priorities, recommends that
the Council initially initiate an improvement district for sewers
along Kauila Street.
Accept the recommendation and the County
initiate an improvement district for
sewers along Kauila, Lehua and Iliahi
Streets. <Au, CS- /&o4.r/nu> -"'2
Ae.c_., Comm. 1605: AGREEMENT FOR THE OPERATION & MAINTENANCE OF THE
KEAUHOU SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
From Chief Engineer dated Sept. 13, 1971, transmitting for
information a copy of the final draft of the subject document
between Kamehameha Development Corporation and the County of
Hawaii, which has been reviewed and approved by the Corporation
Counsel.
Accept the agreement.
111
• PWC-64 - 5 - September 20, 1971
LCL• Comm. 1606: ROAD DEDICATION - KEAUHOU SUBDIVISION
TMK: 7-8-10: Por. 2
From Corporation Counsel dated Sept. 14, 1971, transmitting for
acceptance the road dedication deed for the above subdivision.
The Public Works Department has recommended acceptance.
Accept the road dedication deed.
/LE. Comm. 1608: IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 3, OKINO SUBDIVISION ROAD
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 4: POHAKULANI STREET
From Director of Finance dated Sept. 17, 1971, transmitting
Resolution Nos. 402 and 403 authorizing the Director of Finance
to call for bond redemption for the above improvement districts.
Approve the request and adopt
Resolutions 402 and 403.
CM-277: CHALLENGE, INC. - EXPERIMENTAL HOUSING UNITS IN KONA
Mrs. Alice Greenwell 's request for assistance in obtaining approval
for their experimental housing units in Kona was referred 'to the
Public Works Committee for further study. Their model homes con-
formed to both Federal and State requirements but they have been
unable to obtain approval from the County's Department of Public
Works.
,:Scc-'Comm. 1430.3: From Chief Engineer and Deputy Managing Director dated Sept. 16,
1971, submitting a report on the review to grant approval under
the Building Code, the "paper houses" proposed for sale by
Challenge, Inc.
Request the Chief Engineer to relate
their information denoting these
stipulations to Mrs. Greenwell.
RECOMMENDATION
kt.4c ,No. 1: SPEED LIMITS ON STATE HIGHWAYS
Refer to administration the problem of establishing and putting
into effect speed limits on State Highways using the recently
adopted Ordinance 385 establishing speed limits on Hawaii Belt
Road, in Honokaa as an example of the Council's concern. /S ,C'-
(Souza/Hisaoka)
ill 410 .
,,
.
PWC-64 - 6 - September 20, 1971
Respectfully submitted,
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
40110.. , ,.. .. , ., e. ..„... .L„,.
1
fl S PH1aE R. YADAO, CHIVMAN
,�'--- -D TE K,:, CARPENTER, LICE CHA-` 'N
i/
(ABSENT AND EXCUSED)
SHERWOOD R. H. GREENWELL, MEMBER
1
►1r) ieteuboa
I..-.k0 H SAOKA, w . ;ER
- k� I
orri ES S. SOUZA, MEMBER
. (
'OBERT M. YAMADA,Jj EMBER
September 22, 1971 .
Rec. 1/PWC-64
• Mayor Shunichi Kimura
County of Hawaii
Hilo, Hawaii
Re : Speed Limits . on. State . Highways
The County Council at its meeting held today adopted..
thea following recommendation of its Public Works
Committee with regard to the above :
Refer to administration the problem
of establishing and puttinginto.
effect speed limits, on State Highways
using the recently adopted Ordinance 385
establishing speed limits on Hawaii Belt
Road . in Honokaa as an example of the
; .. Council's concern.
•
TadashiSuzuki
:
COUNTY CLERK
(Souza/Hisaoka)
OFFICE INFORMATION ONLY
atp : See CLK/LA
Action: Chief Engineer informs report; completed and':submitted to
• Planning Dept in May 1972 Dated November 1, 1972
Planning Director informs concern has been adequately
accommodated in June .5, 1972, report 'to State Dept of Education.
Dated December 6, '1972
Re: :PWC-65 '
(Rec. 2)
OFFICE INFORMATION. ONLY
M IN: See': CLK/LA
Action: Chief
. Eng reports' analysis not.`completed: : Dated Nov. I, 1972
Re: PWC-65 • -
(Rec: 3), -
. I41
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
HIL
26 AUPUNI STREET • O HAWAII 96720 SHUNICHIKIMURA
Mayor
,:.......... ......
UEFUJI
COUNTY OF Director H. Dir ctor
HAWAII.
•
June 5 , 1972 • '
Mr. Harry Chuck
District Superintendent
Department of Education
75 Aupuni Street
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
Dear Mr. Chuck:
Thank you very much for giving us the opportunity to review
and comment on your department' s proposed site for Hilo ' s
second high school.
We have reviewed the submitted information and provided our
analysis and recommendations in the attached report.
Should you have any questions , please feel free to contact
us.
Sincerely,
•
RAYMOND H• SUEFUJI •
• DIRECTOR
SF:mn
Encl.
APPROVED: .
0
: V(41447C1/,
;MAYOR
Lc_- 6,S
SECOND HIGH SCHOOL REPORT
rr
Y
0
111
Page
Introduction 1
Recommendation 3
Physical Description 6
Environmental Consideratbns 7
County Requirements 11
Traffic Report Appendix A
Population Projection Appendix B
Map Appendix C
.s .
411
INTRODUCTION
The State Department of Education has embarked on a plan for
the development of a second high school within the Hilo metropoli-
tan area. Findings from studies made by the Department of Education
show that the best possible location for such a high school would
be within the Waiakea area. The site chosen as most suitable
would be north of the existing Waiakea Intermediate and Elementary
Schools and back to back with them. The stated reasons for choosing
this site include its reasonable closeness to the center of the
expected service area; more educational opportunities for higher
learning by .virtue of being next to the Hilo College complex; and
opportunities for the joint use of school facilities within the
area both for students and adults .
Although aware of proposals for a second high school in the
Hilo area, the County of Hawaii has not officially made a commitment
regarding the proposed site. This report has been prepared as the
County' s position insofar as the proposed second high school site
is concerned. It includes substantiation of the County' s position.
A Plan for The Metropolitan Area of Hilo prepared for the
County by Belt , Collins and Associates and previously the County ' s
General Plan for Hilo showed the Waiakea area as the recommended
location for a secondary school. The revised General Plan for
the County of Hawaii , 1971 , states in the Public Facilities section
that "the development of a second high school in Hilo shall be
encouraged" . General Plan guidelines for such sites are that they
conform with the Department of Education ' s requirements (see
-1-
111
"Recommendation" section) ; that they be free from flooding and
drainage problems ; and that they incorporate appropriate street
and driveway design and location to minimize traffic interference,
pedestrian hazard, and to enable safe and easy access. Joint use
of school facilities by the community during after school hours
• is also encouraged.
With these guidelines in mind, we have studied the proposed
site in relation to the Hilo community and the surrounding neighbor-
hood. We have studied the environmental impact of the proposal and
have made comparative traffic studies with existing schools (Hilo
High and Intermediate, Waiakea, and the University) . During the
course of our examination we have also reviewed alternative sites
to determine whether other locations might be- suitable for a second
highschool in the Hilo area.
In April and May, meetings were held with various agencies to
review and discuss the. Department of Education' s proposal. The
County' s Department of Public Works , Traffic Division, Police
Department , the State Department of Transportation, and University
officials all were consulted individually and in groups.
•
-2-
410
RECOMMENDATIONS
Primary considerations for a high school according to .
Department of Education standards include central location,
sufficient size for present and future utilization, accessibility
to students served, traffic considerations , environmental and
health concerns and the prevention of drainage problems. * (*See
map, Appendix C for the first three standards. ) These standards
were also adopted for the revised General Plan for the County of
Hawaii, 1971.
These considerations can readily be met at the subject site
provided that street and related public improvements can be made
in coordination with the school ' s development. Improvements by
the Department of Education and the University of Hawaii must
also be included.
Based on all reports and supportive information, the County
of Hawaii concurs with the selection of site No. 1 for the location
of Hilo ' s second high school. In the selection of this site,
however, a cooperative program should be drawn up with all concerned
agencies to assure the timely and appropriate implementation of the
following listed items.
1. The population of the new high school should be socially
and economically mixed so as to avoid many of the current
social problems now facing urban areas. A social and
economic mix would be representative of all segments of
our society and would not be skewed toward any extreme.
By striving to achieve this , many future problems' might
be prevented.
•
-3 •
-
1
2. Plans should be made for a sewer connection to be
commensurate with Phase III-A of the County sewer
project now under consideration.
3. Maintenance of the facilities as well as their use on
a joint State and County basis should be programmed
at an early stage. This is especially in respect to
recreational and cultural facilities.
4. The installation of traffic lights at critical inter-
sections which serve the school should be an early
consideration.
5 . ' A night light should be installed along Kawili.
6. Pedestrian and bike paths should be developed along
Kinoole, Kawili, and Lanikaula Streets in the vicinity
of the University and the school complex. The possibility
of such paths being established along Kumukoa should also
be investigated. These pedestrian and bike paths should
also extend into the University campus and the school
complex.
7. Another traffic lane for turns from Puainako onto
Kawili should be installed.
8. A bus stop plan for schools should be developed in
coordination with the planned bus system for the city
of Hilo.
9. Covered unloading zones for an approximately 300-car
traffic peak in the morning should be planned for by DOE.
10. DOE should implement their planned internal , inter-school
route to lessen traffic intensity on main roads .
-4-
}
411 410
11. DOE and the University should develop their own defined
parking areas. Parking for night use of the University' s
auditorium by the public should be coordinated with high
school and future library parking.
12. To lessen traffic intensity on Kawili Street, the
University should develop an internal route from the
new housing which is oriented to Kawili Street and the
auditorium parking to Kapiolani Street.
13. The University should contemplate some staggered hours
for classes in order to lessen the peak hour traffic
generated by the public schools.
14. Interior walkways and/or sidewalks on Kawili, Kinoole,
and Kapiolani Streets fronting the school and the
University should be planned.
This list of needed improvements should be construed as
tentative and preliminary. It does not preclude the addition of
other improvements as the need arises and further findings are
made.
-5-
411
•
•
PHYSICAL STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS
Size: Sufficient and expandable from 25 acres to 50 acres
or more .
Location: Basically central to population it intends to serve
both present and future.
Drainage: Adaptable to high intensity use with some improvements .
Access: With intersection and some road widening and related
improvements traffic can be relatively smooth. Main
thoroughfares accommodate the area.
Utilities : See Environmental Considerations section. The summary
is that the proposal is generally non-conflicting and
readily adaptable with some public improvements .
Intensity
of Use: Dwelling .units in the area increased by 7% from 1969
to 1971 . Zoned residential acreages which are vacant
total 927 . Nominal growth of 3 to 5% increase could .
double the residences in this Waiakea area by 1980.
The second high school ' s logical feeder area appears
destined for the largest expansion in residential
development in Hilo.
General
Plan: Where residential development is foreseen, the. Waiakea
area, south of Mohouli contains about 2/3. of the single-
family type of land allocation for the city. Where
location is concerned, site meets criteria of. the General
Plan.
-6-
4
•
•
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS
The need is well documented. in the DOE report. The one existing
high school is over 50 years old, on insufficient acreage and with
most of its buildings already in poor condition. Population growth
and shift trend add to the warranty of a new school.
Safety: Such a site would lessen the present Waianuenue
traffic congestion. and relieve the transportation
need. The existing. school buildings ' conditions
including overcrowdedness would be alleviated.
The new facility can, in its design, accommodate
up-to-date safety features which the present school
does not have .
Neighborhood
Character: A "super school" complex would result but the area
is already not foreign to institutional use with
the University and the intermediate-elementary schools
already within 2, 000 feet of each other.
Economic : Besides the added resultant employment, land values
increase would be speeded up, as would taxes. This
would have occurred to a lesser degree despite the
high school entering the picture, as.-the University
growth would have accelerated it anyway.
There could be a need for added support services
to cater to the student body after school. The
University may possibly contain a snack shop but
has presently no plans lans for on-campus service
-7-
•
•
commercial establishments . The nearest commercial
area would be the Hilo Shopping Center, 4, 000 road . ,
feet distant and the Food Fair complex, 4, 500 feet
away. It is fair to assume business activity here
would increase . Downtown Hilo business activity
could decrease as a result of the smaller student
body at the present school temporarily.
Modification
of Area: There is a major change from vacant land to complete
buildup but no neighborhood. or character change as
institutions predominate already.
ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL POSSIBILITIES
Water •
Pollution: Negligible effect on potable water supply. Drainage
pattern could cause some of the topsoil and fertilizer
(for grass) and chemicals (weed control, etc. ) to flow
eventually to the Waiakea _ Pond. Appropriate care
could prevent the hazards. •
• Other
Effluents &
Emissions : Would mostly consist of auto engine exhaust as it
is anticipated that incineration of solid wastes
would not be done here. Noise would mostly be from .
increased traffic and internal school activities.
External noise from aircraft might affect the property
itself but only in a minor way as inter-island jets
use the North-South runway only about 5% of the total
Landing and takeoff time .
-8-
•
Alternatives: Other locations can be considered. The DOE report
lists and analyzes them as shown in the attachments . ,
Our general assessment is that the alternates would
not serve the greater need for a proximate site
now, and would by their location require more public
transportation and likely more private auto traffic.
Furthermore, the alternate sites are away from the
people needing to be served.
•
Relationship Between Short-Term Use
and the Long-Term Productivity:
The site as a commercial or industrial area does s not
seem appropriate .
Eventually therefore this presently vacant site would
have had to be altered either into residential use,
or open space if not into the institutional one being
considered. Its current vacant status is neither
productive nor desirable. Institutional use appears
very compatible, and the sharing and joint use
concepts of school buildings, a possible library and
recreational facilities appear very feasible for this
sector of the community on a permanent basis.
Implementing this proposal will result in a major
permanent addition to an already existing' educational
complex. One square mile in area will become an
educational system of school buildings and related
facilities.
The major impact will be similar to having nearly
9, 000 young people of varied ages "working" during
-9-
4111
the day (5, 000 at the University, 2, 000 at the high
school, approximately 1, 500 at junior high) . With
recreational, cultural •.(including library) facilities,
a growing amount of evening activity will also occur.
Increased leisure time may accelerate uses directed
•
toward_this complex during off hours and the area may
. readily become a center of these activities.
Irrevocable
Commitment of
Resources: Being vacant . and with no particular resources contained
in the land .itself, there is no significant depletion
• of resources. There is-_ no curtailment of future
activity foreseen except : that of residential use for
which this State-owned land was zoned. The overall
supply of other suitable residential land appears
adequate to compensate or substitute for this school
use of RS zoned land.
Economic,
Social Cost: This proposal would give the people in this section
of the city a full range of educational, social,
cultural and recreational facilities to utilize if
inter-governmental and inter-agency sharing of
responsibility can be achieved:
Except for adjacent University dorms and housing,
the development would preclude residences from within.
The adverse effects upon residents within the general
area would mainly be the peak hour traffic.
•
-10-
COUNTY REQUIREMENTS
Site: Meeting DOE _ standards, as adopted by General Plan,
is suitable.
Traffic : See detailed report, Appendix A
Building: Must meet building code and plan approval but can
be reviewed. later. ..
Subdivision: No problems . anticipated if drainage controls can be
implemented. Walkways, sidewalks development may be
imposed. •
Zoning: School use is permitted if meets General Plan
standards, which it does.
Grading: By the time of construction scheduling, a form of
grading regulations should be in effect and
conformance requirement.
Bike Routes: Consideration should be given this aspect .
Others: See list attached to recommendation. .
f 1
r..
l -11-
r ' A
411
• TRAFFIC ANALYSES OF
ALTERNATE HICH SCHOOL SITES •
•
This report was prepared in response to the Department of Education's concern ;
over possible traffic congestion occurring from the construction of a second
high school. Figure 1 shows the four alternate sites considered in this
report.
• In selecting a school site, we feel that the major traffic factor to be con—
sidered iswhether projected traffic volumes can be adequately accommodated
by planned roadways and that the degree of congestion should have very little
emphasis. Our analysis of Site #1, Kawili Site, therefore does not stress
the degree of congestion nor does it compare traffic flows with the other
alternate sites. Rather, we have looked at traffic patterns and projected
traffic volumes and have analyzed these in terms of whether the patterns can
accommodate the volumes. We have also listed some considerations that could
possibly improve traffic .flow and promote traffic safety.
Unlike Site ##1, where the surrounding streets are developed and a schematic
of the school is available, Sites 12, #3 and #4 are only marks on the map. •
New streets will he developed, accesses must be determined, and districting
changed. In this regard, we have not conducted any detailed studies due to
lack of information. We have instead listed considerations and requirements
to look into should a detailed study be required.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
APPENDIX A
•
SECTION A - ANALYSIS OF SITE /I1 - KAWILI SITE
I. BACKGROUND DATA •
• A. Data Used
1. Per coordination with Planning Department
- a. Dwelling units
b. Enrollment figures
c. Alternate sites
• 2. Traffic volume counts by the Department of Public Works
3. Charts from Highway Capacity Manual
4. "Morning Peak Hour Study" for Hilo High School '
by William C. Hong, consulting engineer
B. Factors Utilized
1. Transportation of students •
•
• a. 30% by school bus •
b. 10% will walk •
c. 30% on vehicles to remain (parked)
d. 30% on vehicles that are passing thru (unloading)
2. Vehicle loads
a. 2 Students arrive per parked vehicle
b. 1-1/2 students arrive per unloading vehicle
c. 40 students arrive per bus
.II. STUDY . RESULTS •
• : A. Existing Traffic Counts •
•
See Figure 2
B. Traffic Generated by the Second High School or Hilo College that
Has Kawili Street as its Destination
•
See Figure 3 •
C. Projected 1980 Traffic Assignments
See Figure 4
•
--2-
•
• t
®
D. Capacity Analyses •
•
Volume counts are low except during the morning peak hour on school
days. We have therefore analyzed the traffic patterns for this peak-
hour only. Capacity and volume counts are shown in Figure 5.
1. Definitions
a. Peak-Hour Volume (PHV) - The highest number of vehicles that
•
pass over a section of a roadway •during 60 consecutive minutes.
b. Maximum Capacity (MC) - The maximum number of vehicles which
• has a reasonable expectation of passing over a given section
of .a roadway in one direction during a given time period under
:prevailing roadway and traffic conditions.
c. Desired Capacity (DC) - Capacity at which stable operation
occurs and which is usually used in urban design practice.
This level produces some waiting periods and back-up conditions.
• Most drivers feel somewhat restricted but not objectionably. so.
d. % Assigned (%A) - Percentage of time needed to pass a certain
capacity.
2. Comparisons to be Made
a. MC versus PHV • •
If PHV is greater thin MC, the intersection is overloaded and
conditions must be altered.
b. DC versus PHV
•
If DC is equal to or greater than PHV, traffic flow is accept-
able.
3. Conditions Analyzed
a. Existing volumes with existing roads
b. 1980 volumes with existing roads
• c. 1980 volumes with minimum improved roads
III. DISCUSSION
A. Capacity Analyses (Figure 5)
1. Existing Conditions
Three key intersections leading to the 2nd high school were analyzed.
The Puainnko Street approach to the l;inoole-Puainako intersection
-3-
•
is the only section where the PHV (648) is greater than the
• DC (586) . This concurs with field observations of traffic
back-up on Puainako Street.
•
2. 1980 Traffic Projections
•
The existing intersections were analyzed utilizing volume counts
projected for 1980. For all three intersections, the projected
volumes were lower than maximum capacity but greater than desired
capacity. The major problem area is the same approach listed in
paragraph 1.
3. 'Street Improvements
•
The 1980 volume counts were analyzed utilizing a 40-foot pavement
widening along Kinoole Street and right turn lanes on Iwalani
Street. With these improvements, 'traffic flows fall into the
acceptable category.
B. Improvements •
1. Planned
•
a. Puainako Street widening and/or relocation by the State
b. Kinoole Street widening from Mohouli to Olona Streets by
County.
2. Desired in Near Future •
a. Widen section Of Kapiolani Street at Lanikaula Street
•
b. Widen Kawili Street between Kinoole Street and Kilauea Avenue
c. Install street lights along Kawili Street to facilitate night
school functions and auditorium use
• d. Provide pedestrian and/or bicycle pathways along Kinoole
Street, Kawili Street, and Lanikaula Street
•
•
e. Kinoole Street widening from Olona to 1000 ft. Puna of
Puainako Street
•
• 3. To be Considered
a. Third lane for turns on Kawili Street
b Traffic signal systems '
(1) Along Puainako St . at Kawili , Kinoole and Kilauea
(2) . Along Kawili St. at Kapiolani, Kinoole and Kilauea
-4-
•
C. Desired with School Complexes
1. Hilo College •
a. Sufficient covered unloading area off Kapiolani Street, or
preferably Lanikaula Street.
. -`b. Parking areas with entrances on Lanikaula and Kapiolani Streets.
c. Controlled, selected accesses from Kawili Street onto parking
areas.
d. Sufficient off-street parking area for dorm residents and
visitors.
e. Pedestrian and bicycle paths connecting dorms directly to
• main campus to provide bypass route in lieu of using Kawili
• Street.
f. Provide lighting for parking area and internal streets.
g. Plan for bus stop for County Bus System.
2. High School (DOE) •
•
a. Sufficient covered unloading area to accommodate 300 vehicles
in the morning peak.
b. Separate loading zones to accommodate buses.
c. Main asphalt area fronting buildings be used for unloading
zones and reserved parking for staff, visitors, library users
and some students.
d. Separate parking area be,developed with separate access for
bulk of student parking. Possible site is area between athletic
fields and school buildings. In this manner, site would be
close to classrooms so students will use and also could be
used during athletic events.
e. Provide lighting for parking area and internal streets.
f. Provide connection from intermediate school to the high school
as a bypass route to utilization of the Puainako-Kawili
• intersection.
g. Plan for bus stop for County Bus System.
h. Revise intermediate school traffic pattern.
-5-
•
ill
•
•
D. Other Considerations •
•
1. Staggered Hours
•
The use of staggered starting times will spread out the peak period
instead of having a concentration at 7:40. One possible suggestion
is:
7:30 Hilo College
7:50 Elementary
8:00 Intermediate
• 8:10 High School
2. Promote County Bus System
Should a County Bus System be implemented, routes to Hilo College
and the high school should be provieed. This would provide an
• alternate means for student arrivals, especially for Hilo College,
and decrease the traffic volume.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
A. Effect of Second High School •
1. There will be little net effect on the present traffic problem at
the Puainako-Kinoole intersection. The second high school would •
increase thru traffic on Kinoole Street but should re-route some
traffic from Puainako Street onto Kawili Street.
2. The total peak-hour traffic on Kawili Street will increase from
the present volume of 276 vehicles to 880 vehicles. The inter-
sections of Kawili Street with Puainako, Kapiolani and Kinoole
would be taxed but will have sufficient capacity to handle the
traffic. With additional improvements, the volume-capacity ratio
would fall within the acceptable range.
3. The construction of the high school could be the vehicle to provide
improved patterns at the intermediate and elementary schools through
a proposed 'connecting roadway.
4. Implementation of the staggered starting hours will spread out the
concentration period and facilitate traffic movement. •
•
B. Hilo College and the Department of Education must provide:
1. Adequate off-street parking.
2. Adequate student unloading area..
3. Controlled and coordinated accesses.
• 4. Coordination with other agencies for the funding and programming
of needed improvements; e.g. , street lights, street widening, sewers
and drainage.
•
-6-
• t
® I
•
SECTION B - ANALYSES OF SITES NOS. 2, 3 AND 4
• Y. BACKGROUND DATA •
The basic factors derived in Section A are used for all sites.. After
• deducting those volumes generated by Hilo College, the following have been
set as preliminary traffic input data:
1. Peak-hour volume generated by the high school is 650 vehicles.
2. 450 Parking stalls should be provided on campus.
3. A covered unloading area capable of handling 320 vehicles each
morning is required.•
0
The analyses of the sites assumes that the parking and unloading require-.
ments will be met and therefore would not be a problem.
II. ANALYSIS OF SITE #2 - HAIHAI-KILAUEA AREA •
A. Existing Conditions •
• 1. Kilauea Street has bottlenecks on both ends - a one-way pattern at
the Keaau end and a one-lane bridge near Haihai Street.
•
• 2. Haihai Street is a substandard street that is destined to be a major
east-west connector highway.
•
•
3. There are four side streets leading to the school site off Haihai
• Street: (I) Aloalo Street; (2) Hiluhi.lu Street; (3) Hauoli Street;
(4) Kupaa Street. These are narrow streets with minimal connec-
tions onto HaihaiStreet.
B. Discussion
The areas along Haihai Street are being developed and traffic volumes
will increase. The narrow existing streets will not be able to accom-
• modate the expected volumes. Considerations should be given to the
• • following in connection with developing school plans :
1. Widen the narrow bridge on Kilauea Street. •
2. Improve Haihai Street. •
3. Improve the Haihai-Kinoole and Ilaihai-Kilauea Avenue intersections.
4. Channelize the intersection of Kilauea Avenue with the Connector
Road to the Belt Highway. The access road could he located directly
across this connector road to form a typical cross intersection.
-7-
411
•
5.. A secondary access off one of the side streets would lessen the
volume along Kilauea Avenue.
C. Conclusion •
•
No existing streets will provide the necessary capacity to handle the
• projected volumes. Kilauea Avenue must be improved by widening the
narrow bridge and improving its intersection with Haihai Street.
III. ANALYSIS 'OF SITE 113 - PANAEWA SITE
A. Existing Conditions •
The site is undeveloped. The Hawaii Belt Road is a four-lane divided
highway• and has ample capacity.
•
B. Discussion
Traffic problems would include the internal patterns and the connection
to. the State Highway. Coordination with and approval from the State
Department of Transportation is required. Storage turning, lanes are
desirable, especially for the outbound lanes.
C. Conclusion
No problems . foreseen. It would be desirable to have storage turning
• lanes constructed. Early coordination with the State Department of
Transportation is recommended.
IV. ANALYSIS OF SITE #4 - KO'_•fOHANA SITE
'A. Existing Conditions
1. Komohana Street is a high capacity, paved, two-lane, undivided
street with adequate shoulders,. •
2. Plans for the Ainako-Mohouli Extension are underway.
•
•
3. Area is undeveloped.
B. Discussion
- Komohana Street is the major maukthru street that connects Waianuen_.e
Avenue to the Uaiakea Homesteads area. Storage turning lanes will be
required for any access road and also at Mohouli Street.
The Ainako-Mohouli Street Extension will be a heavily used connector
street. Storage turning lanes would be a desirous feature should an
access he provided off this street. Possibly two accesses, one off
Komohana and one off Mohouli, would be more advantageous in that it
would divide the concentration.
•
-8-
, j
411
C. Conclusion . -
•
Left-turning traffic will create delays and back-ups along either
Komohana and/or Nohouli Street. To keep traffic flowing, adequate '
left-turning lanes must be provided at the school access road and at
Mohouli Street.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
-9-
•
o
•
j•-.. .
> .\ /- /.41'P 'N., 4,
1f `! \ Naw
Gam, /ti, •)7'
d
/72-)s: - 'L • . . , /N 7-- ,
ii'" c."--„4„---,3%...---......3.7_,__...: •
•
`?':' /
.\\
•
`o ,(fir \"' Y �Z��
r? . _Z i=' a&I\4 4.,-- .1:711V.6re=rf •
YZ\\ Wit_ •
�� ;� (n' • �� / / Y9
� �
I
Yv fir\ ...., ....
.....__, �- 1 t :-..........'.... t.1%,...........
u� � '� �yi. 1 mca'��sr azz, m_a--r_ �.3 �°
•
• .
41000 .....4. .. -..
il 1..\T.,,,,,::',
•
•
\-\.7\-j
•
•
•
ri --,.-..--..-cr-,.--.•=.="........-.4-4-.11--r-...--r-r.-.---asa--1.'1-‘-f-ar-c-,2,--1.------2-2..-7-H
•
L.
I
II
li
•
•
h\ / (----- I. \ I,
�. 1t
/ / / /
t• -,
? ; •:1--->! rl ..--;)I..-_-.,1 • . • 1
. •
_ ---------
..----,_
--------
i . • 1 A. ,
/7 7::: i',./7 A Cli7,1 .;' 7(..,.1.,',--//,`13.5;' . , ..„.,---- 1 sic. ,7: .•.
•-•,,,,-
,
, .A::: Cif,A• ,.,/,....1!.',:"
i . .
I • '•-.• r" c.,,,,...„.„.--- : s. '. ( 1 1 .
• C:-': ,.,‹ \'Ns', \ '' l'—'2'
1 • . ‘ ,, . -1 ill-ill' ''',., ,..-<--cy-) , , N ss \ --1_, •
-- ,,,< \,:,•\\,.iNN.\\\\\\N.\.,(c-.0 , I ii. .
___.,--...„..--. , „.. , \ \ \ ‘ , ,
1 -
\ ,.,-.A .,''''' -<!-.1 s.,\,,i.NN.N.,:\ Ih'....:-.V.Y•:::•:..: 0 1•• I ,s-J •
. . , )A ;,•;' N .N .
. A --- ..; •-•-./. 'N'''' \
'..\\*N '-.. ,. ••••.. \ - . ..--...\-'••)-•..,
1........________- ..••••''''''.:(--.----, •..:::.----.-- . ' 9,,,,,L) '\:.\*.„N. \„,,..". -\...\,,.\,,. N,, \s.\ \ , '..1 -.11
`N-..:,,-*\ -N--\----\\\, -.`;\\\-\•1 ,. •
I ' c-L''' N'-• ‘:-.; `. V•-, :‘\.\X\ N'N' ll •
1 -------. ----:' N -‘ '-. 'N '- ' .,N-, ., NN,\\,•• I x .
..1- (;‘•\C) •/- ..,"•-•.. ', ,\ ',...,\''Ns N. • r• .0
I
1 _______________\ • .Ct N 1 , .-- \ . \ \ sN s\N • •• ‘,11_
.'••• _ 0(j .. • ) C.)V , 'c5 V 2.\\N.\‘,..-,:i\ss Ns \‘..Ns \.:\s‘ . NN,\
• •
I V--
41 ( .1.`, - N ••' 1.--'
...- . • • 9 ,. . • ,, \ N. '‘.
---t—
i-i kr,d \ .,\ --Toorios-. •N
N , • •• `.. 0 ,z,1 , ‘ .!-\. \ .N. 'N,'*. N''
-i. \ • ‘- *' 9 -C-' - ,.`..L-\ ' ` /-('-0/f1 /"Q \\\ 'N,\\N •••.'N \ I,
c, 1-. .1 \ ' .."-'' thi ,c-J-`), (,-.7c0c-fa&ci ' N N NN ''••N\'\2 N I
‘,. \ s',N \/--It I I'• • -,' '„ \ ' .,--i . 2\ ‘''‘ N„..,.\. \\S•N • \N.•N\s'\\ (4 1 -
; ;.z_ \ .ss, -. •'\\N'N''' s'1,... ....;J:'...: -, -.‘'.\Ns,. \„....\\.NN,N, .• . 0 1,9
• s --..N-.N, NN.'.'' --...-----:::,,-11`.\\.. •'-•.\\ '-..,`,„ ..' 'N.',N ,U--.114L1,1.1'):-..1 51 i I .
-_ • • r„
--.-_ • •
• \ N\.'N 2'.,.!----- i' \N \N.N2. N \. :><"•K‘s'. -', --. -, <aft _ '7'C' • .
Hi \ ''_ \ c , -,,N ' '., •-,‘ s. N. ".,..,-- , ',„ - .I_L.',//0.•..,P,,Y_i...... -
\ 7'1', N.. -. \ \ N-\:-... • ,..„-..-- --,„\„. „. . , Li.. i•yr-
i -• - - .s• N • -- --.N„--„.-N-N-N.,,yg=iyivi:.N. il
. ,
i ________4_,_ • .s.,...„....„.„,...... \ N.\ •„„.• ..... N. ... .„<:: -, .... .. .\--... .\----\\:, 1
,
i ._--:.----- \ ,, , .„ , ..,N.,,,,\ \ ,,,,...\\, ,,N\ .
i ‘...._ . -,.., N. • \ \ ..,'`..„.
•1 „ . \
, . \ '.\\NN•'\,' N' PY.Y.Vii \ - •N '' 0 a \... \ , , 0.22
' -
I .111 '
\ ---- -- ,cucei...y41a •
\ '--. •. , ,-..zr.-.•\ ._.. . .. ... NN...N \ \\
\ • % •,
\ .. ,.. /7./. .:i s.„, '...\•' L L...1.1',... . .
\ N '''. -' s. N \' ‹N • 'N .h , es..\-: \
'• \ \\ ‘NN \• N\
1k, • • ' • . -.. • N•••• \ N\ \ \ N\ . rati
.-N. • . •-• 'N '.. .\-." N '-, \\ ., \ • -' ' • F
1
• \
NN
/ . -, :: N.N\ \- s\ s'... \\N'N, \ \ \,.\' 9t 3 1.
I •• \ \N'''‘\\ iN\ N. \.\.'•'.'NX\ N\\-\\N\N't\ 1,1•
N a
‘-. \ N„. , -Oa.7 \ s....s.\ ...., ''... -\ \., 'N ..., , . I ,
/'----. •" . ‘% \ '' '` • --.' ' . ''' ''' \ N \.s' N\ 'N'l\'
\I\.'. ''' \\ \.'. N • ' ‘.. • N \ \N ' \'
/ • \. \.. s'n \ .. ..., s \ \ • %. ' .\\ \ \ ,N, ,
0 . .
1. \ L' '‘. ‘•\*\ ''..s. --\NN•‘‘. \''.\‘' " '‘.\\ db>\'\N, N,`-\\
// ' \ ' ' \ ''\ 'N, \\N '• ', `s-- • .`N\ N\ .
ol cj \ //,.,, - • '.. '\ N. \N-, •. '. -. -,. N„‘ ., ,,, ••, . ., \ \
•.......---:- .,
)G lk, ' ', -• '\''-.' 1,10/57,1b'dX_7 N. '..
- \ .- ....:-5L). ..',NN.• 'ss- ' ... • • . , .
N ',.. ,, ••, • /-1/7 0.2goc/oHci -N`, --,
, :-.....3., ......,. .........„-11,7.43....n.....A. s.,...\\:. 2. s. s,...
. N. ..s•••• .....\\--\ \'`,-....... ' 1
•‘\ -,,...,N,.\::'--<.. ...-: N\\*\‘'•'N s...NN \\•. ,
( . \ , • • - \ \\ \ .N\\\ ,..\\.... ...sss ‘...>n, ....2\\,,s .\\‘‘.. -, `..s. ;
. • \ \\•••\ •••'. \\2`, 'N. \...,. -. 'N. \\\.\\--:>.... •••-.::•\,\ .. —
•s, '.. •`.:\\\'Ns\N...N\\\N . ‘•.\\. \N N\\N\\\N \NN Ns'N •' NN .
' \ N' \ • ,\s‘• ••\\• ‘\ N• • \.\ '\ . N\ NV' ' \NX\
. • \ \ ,
, \
‘ \ . \\N.'s\\\\.,\••• ...\\\\:\\.\•••\N. N \ •.„ \\-, •• s\''• \\•‘.•-.. '..\\\*N\ ;
‘ s\. ' • •‘ . \\...N. s••• \ ' '' -\--- N- '''.'--\ ''' '. \' ss' '' \‘';:',' //:.-');C'''•:. ' 1
. ,
. • \ '
\ • ..........•
vi- ‘
CN .,''''. ' . • :.
' / •
/ . .
\ ••••
/ .
I 6- • . .
-.)-- -
--.1- . . •
. .
• '.......7::_l_____,Pep<....i..F 7v.7.::
•
• • ,,,,./.11:,,,.‘ •://i.v./. ------'-'."."--.--7'.. •
•
...."".
0 ..
I.-.I '•,...' e-..--;)C....? L._
. — ........
• — . ..__ .. . .
,*-:::.---:.
--- — -
-:::::1 1,--I r---1. ---1Q.:)/•\ 72:-?.! 1-1 C.)1--I --.>1\..-7:L-1<=1 . L.....---,)1,1 l _ 1 c_-_ ..;I >:..:1
I-i iNt::3 I-�CC.7-ii --i i-�.� • i- �,-�:i--i :mac —it"`h C i---_ L.. c?C-_C� L_L.[=-:c
' .,GALE / ,-,060- '
•
1-
G
•
` \
-\\X • \ \ • s• ..
\N \ ',.\\''\\„\\\ \ \\\
„,\:•„. \:.\\:\\:\ \ \ \�\ \\ \ Boa
\.. \\ \• • r.0• +tA`,� 1
\\,.., ,... -,-,c, .., . „N., \\...\:::, \ ....... ... N\, .. .. 7
\\.. N\25\\\N\•\-7.„ss s`• :.s.s- Ns .1.,"-\\22:,\NS 2-4.\\:\‘'N‘ • .11 . 0 \--:1
• i N 182 , 'NN \\\ \\\ \\\\ N\N\ ' \ V
.0 e.�ic/ . .\ \ \\\ \ \ \ % !
•
•
39 \ \ LNIV R )7 Y`•.r___,..-_—_'-'...'--?-1-- - • ... N\\N ',.., \...N.si's•-, . 's-- \• i
I \ 52 `N"- <\'
\.s.
.;s. . \ OF \'-, a \ I
I \ Ell • \
\\, \-,�-\\\\ PRo��osEn p ( P • o
\ \ . \ \\ sctrov� \ �. G�IJ ., j
\\ I
\ jr• , ,f-N.,-,,,, \ •, \ . t!` cy--) , ,.......,
. . .• ..\\(,\ , ... .\ 1-- ....,..• \ .2-\.., '
1 \ •..\ .ss...\\\.\\\i„.\\,\:\
I .'\ \,N\\‘ \' \.”'< e' \qi?- .
t --- -..J /
, 1.75rv-f/Ji 1 ,..,,,.,, , ,...., " ,p ffi it-a /I
--/
L. i_ IC,L_.ii<�.i_.. 5
. ............_ ,-,--
1 5,<---'c) F:'F's_-__C7)_.1 ti-7-1(,---1- i (7)1 i•_.._)
..., _ _
•
•
- . W • ________.....
. _.
,.. -,-„,.„, 14,V7// •
C/71.-i
. .
1-- •
•', ,e--
. . • ""f-
‹..
, • / . ,..
. .•• .
• / • •)
• ....••• \ ..' '.
.......__,............ ....
\ .. •
...___..,............-.—
' I .
\
. • I - . \
„ •
\ \ .. .\ \ ‘`, N. N s•• ‘• N \ \.\ • •
' I , , - s'• N'N, .. N‘ N\\\ •• ss \N \\\ \ \. , \ \ .
• I ‘ NN'S: \\ ,N. \'.' N'\ \\N\ \\\ '
I \ N Ns N \ \ 's \ 1
,1 1 \ \‘‘N\\‘., N-N ••\ , NN Ns Ns\ \ \ \N <\\
" i N NN .,,.N''."• .\ \\ \‘ `\ -.'.\• f•\
N. ,... ... N. N., • i
i \\ '‘‘‘,% N."‘, \•\ \ \ \\\\s ',s. \N. ...,
NN '-• .` '
, 1 ss '\.'s2N., \N,\\ \.<:\\NCN:\ s 's„ • NN N\\ N\ \ s•••, N s'N N. )
/ l i
Ns N '\ N\ N •••• N N'\.s.\\.\\N N\\\\\ Ns. •••• p
' 1 N\\N.'s> :, \\N-\\\ \N‘NN.\N\Ns-., \ s. 's ''`• N s- ' \ \ N ..1/3" I
N N
-, PROPO5L-7, MI ‘\
-., ,\\X\ • Li'' P
p!.. ,...i. ,../ ' \5\---•-. 1
•:• I
N, ., - •• --'`-. EXPETYSION , :\'• '- , ' ,,,' ‘,...")...-'-
'-,'.\\`-. \ .-,,X --.. ,, ,„ \ ',.. ., • ..// < 1
N - N ' -.. <c, N •• , -, N,,`-, - N ‘.. '/ \ 1::
1 \ NI.N.,\\ N N N -P s N ' N%N, N ',N..N,'•N ./
. Ns.\\N'-,\Ns - •,,‘, -..\'-\N%,,,\s. N / . "i'
,.
II
. N . N s N... NNN\N. , N .,\c'L' N,N • '., . / \
N. N N \-N\N.. ',N N 's. •
' 4.00 "- 02, N\ N.N\ '-• ‘. -•\ •-•,'- \ --„', . -. '-• •• ' / •\ • ,E, c2,--- i
\ sit
• I • \ Ns-, N, - •-\\-, . i'N`, \ \%<,-4;--NN --. •-•,, • -. / co-,)--,,.04
1 \ •-• --... -, - - \ -N- •-, N N \N N -.. . \ !.,. - ''-
I •^,n. .j--4.v..-4/ • ' \ X- N N\N N\ '
,,Th L"-c--/ . •-• 7-------
-• -. •-• --• ,r_.„._ ,r--,--, . • z.itin/5/? /7-Y •- \• ---/, \ I
1
N
i .. JO • - -f ,
- OF ' ' • •
• - , \ N, ...., \ 1
. ,
ii s .. .. IN \ ' \
I I L ...,2N ‘,.,. N •.,‘ `,....„N\\. \\.. 'N. /1/1/5/5.‘ .... s N •.. ... ..., • \ • i
--1---;--1 1\ '1,. N N N. -„
• t ik\z,4:-..NN\ .N,:•N\<<\ •., ,.... N: : NN .,N,'N, • \ ,.. '... \ • •".,
) I • \\Ns, ..s. N. N 0N N N N . • ‘ .
N•N \
• 3 00 . . . ,- --, • NN .. \N\ NN.‘, • .. \ .
---"----
i.1. -•-11 'N •\,.. ',...‘\ \ •.. ,:;. • `.., 'N. ..N. , .\\,„ , , • vc\ .4.
= • .\\. \•,-)\ . .., '\ \ ' \ \ • ' 1
'=.1
1 ifirERI:-ff.D.//77.E, .., -... „....x-•,N. • , ., ,0 \ -
° "...„.><\.. N. `.„,N. ,, \., ;......A\ ‘.... ....,i .,,, N., \
. I rL 15 P fE IV TiclITY -; -, • • \'. . N_.4...--- ,._!:::,..,",:. . •, „. ._ - • C_
N\/ ..\, N. .,.•S • N •
NC HOOL\ N NN NN \,',.. N ‘`. .,!. ,,,,\C32'-', • .„r ipi-;- s's..-. \
\ - ,-
N \ ' ,- •
. 1 ., ... N \. • N ,Z
//IC// N. ..>. '-• r.:, C . ••• ',
I' . • ---4 N.` '\'-.2\-...\N,N ‘,- 5C/i001- NN‘• \:'''.‘ ' HI) .\\ . \ \3 A
. .• 1 —1 N.,Ns:: \N::„.„ '..„ `. . ‘...„..,•., "„ N,\\\N„\\.‘\ =1 • \ , 5 .) kt
A r"-------------- ''
\ 't
NNN.‘N N \K\.„ • :,-‘-'. ;,/ `-c,/ -1" . i
I Z I r''-\ s‘N-.N •-:\T'-^:- -'-'7,.-\• \ N\ . 1. - • ''.... . • •
NN‘NN N\'-''• „,..-- i. . ..., . • . t
• \ , N .. N.2,---;,,,, .....,,,'"- • • ' • • ..
• t
N; ... N, N. \\\ \\•-• '- '
i_ •••. ‘i -.•-• --\\ ' • r-.•'::-". „,.)•sf? .
N ., s. •
1400 1,50 \N
.0.-
k•-•
•....... '-'1•\_________.- •
• • .
• .
I • • . ,
FT-1,n
1
_,
_ . .
. .
(-2-7, ."7-1 7.!. fit-,-.-!/ /
(,...." -:2 (..:.e (n.,'1 i 1',-1 7"t•.•;/-7
i • e-,:.,--('''D t.....r 7'I(``a i j.....‘ri fri ti - ?1
.1/.:'. 77/
"-IL,',)i,.., k.'"i e 1.-,Vje.‘,/", /7,
? • ,
I 1 .,...................-. •
.....„..,........ ......., :
----
.'-'-- -
L' 1, .
•
• i
•
110 III .
CAPACITY ANALYSES •
Intersection - PUAINAKO-KAWILI KIN00LE-PUAINAKO KINOOLE-KAWILI :
Street - Puainako Kawili - Kinoole IPuainako Kinoole Kawili
4
STREET ANALYSES
1. Maximum Capacity 1,320 1,700 1,372 1,357 1,993 1,696
2. Desired Capacity 1,056 1,360 1,098 1,086 1,594 1,357
INTERSECTION ANALYSES
A. EXISTING
1. Peak-Hour Volume 592 246 508 648 564 258 '
• 2. Maximum Capacity 594 935 508 855 564 1,221
@ % Assignment 45% 55% 37% ' 63% 28% 72%
3. .Desired Capacity 592 598 508 586 546 882
@ % Assignment 56% 44% 46% 54% 35% 65%
.
.
B. 1980 PROJECTION 1 •
1. Peak-Hour Volume 720 490 640 700 750 750 '
2.' Maximum Capacity 720 765 640 719 750 1,051
@ % Assignment 55% 45% 47% 53% 38% 62;_' .
3. Desired Capacity 720 435 640 456 750 719
@ % Assignment 68% 32% 58% 42% • 47% 53%
• C. INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS -i
r
1. Peak-Hour Volume N.A: N.A. N.A.
Less Right Turns ! -- 441 493 -- 675 --
a. Max. Capacity i -- . -- 493 896 675 1,119 .
@ % Assignment ' .36% 64% 34% 66%
b. Desired Capacity; -- --- 493 597 675 787 . ,
@ % Assignment ! • 45% 55% 42% 58%
2. Peak Pour Volume i i
Less Left Turns l -- -- 384 700 -- --
a. Desired Capacity -- -- 384 706 -- --
0 % Assignment I 35% 65°%
i
a :
FIGURE 5
•
Ill
TRAFFIC SUMMARY
•
A detailed study of Site #1 was made since schematics were available and local
streets in the area are already developed. The remaining three, sites are in
undeveloped areas where meaningful data is unobtainable. Accesses to the sites
are undetermined, zoning and districting changes are required, and new streets
will be constructed. . Therefore, only a general overall analysis was made of
Sites #2, ##3, and #4. •
It is assumed that the Department of Education will provide adequate parking
and unloading areas on campus and therefore our studies converned itself with
traffic on public streets and accesses to the school sites.
SITE #1 - KAWILI STREET SITE
The traffic congestion at the Puainako-Kinoole Street intersection will remain
about the same. The intersections along Kawili Street at Puainako, Kapiolani,
and Kinoole Streets will be taxed but there is sufficient capacity available
to handle the volume. This would be a congested condition with delays and
• back-ups. With street improvements and staggered hours, the volume/capacity
ratio would fall out of the congestion range and into an acceptable range.
SITE- #2 - HAIHAI-KILAUEA AREA •
The existing streets in this undeveloped area are substandard. There is no
adequate access unless Kilauea Avenue is improved by widening the narrow
bridge and by improving its intersection with Raihai Street.
SITE #3 - PANAEWA SITE
The major problem is to provide an adequate access off the Belt Highway. It
would be desirable if storage turning lanes could be provided. Early coordna-
tion with the State Department of Transportation is recommended.
SITE #4 - KOMOHANA SITE • -
• - Komohana Street is the major mauka thru street. Any left-turning movements
. off this street would cause back-ups. Storage turning lanes should be provided
. along Komohana at the access road and at Mohouli Street.
•
•r -
411
1970 CENSUS DATA FOR
WAIAKEA INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL DISTRICT
BLOCK PERSONS D. U. **
205 4604 1313
206 (partial) 1209* 308 .
207 • 5231 1437
208 (partial) 85* 24
209 1615 427
TOTAL 12744 3509
* Derived from dwelling unit count by Planning Department.
** Dwelling Unit count by Planning Department.
Source : U.S. 1970 Census Block Statistics.
UNDER 18 YEARS CENSUS - CITY OF HILO
CHILDREN .. RATE TO RATE TO
AGE GROUP 1960 TOTAL POP.* 1970 TOTAL POP.** •
0 - 4 2934 11 .2% 2226 8.4%
5. - 11 (Elem) 4479 17. 2 3813 14.4
12 - 14(Inter) 1774 6.8 1822 6.9
15 - 17 (High) 1645 • 6. 3 1788 6.7
10832 41 .7% 9649 36.6%
* Total Population = 25, 966
** Total Population = 26, 353
Source : U.S. Census Data .
1
APPENDIX B
L ',
410
VALIDITY OF PROJECTIONS
1980 Hilo Population 42, 000 with 14, 000 D.U. ' s (3 persons/D.U. )
1970 " 28, 000 with 8, 240 units
Increase per year estimate 14;000/10 = 1400 persons (5% of 1970 pop.
annually - high
No. of person per dwelling unit • = 3 .0 but adequate for
design purpose)
Dwelling Units increase per year = 575
Waiakea Area in 1970 had approximately 3200 dwelling units or 38%
of City. .
Waiakea Area in 1980 is estimated to have 5275 dwelling units or
37% .of City.
SOME DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS OF TRAFFIC FLOW FOR 1980
GENERATED BY ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL AREAS
20% In Bound Cumulative
. 1980 Local + 80% Travel Design of
Est. Daily Puna City Lanes Traffic Flow
Traffic Bound Bound (to town) Toward Town .
Zone I 5145 1030 4115 5 )
Zone II 12530 2500 10030 8 )
Zone III. 4060 . 800 3260 9 ) 17305
Zone IV 10780 2160 8620 16 )
Zone V 2520 500 2020 3 )
35035 28045 .
If 17305 or 1730 (10% peak hour) utilize only the major highway
towards the city then it would be Komohana, Kinoole, Kilauea,
Kanoelehua (7 travel lanes toward city) or 250 VPH/lane . Design
is adequate for maximum - 600/lane.
•
APPENDIX_ B
® •
TRAFFIC GENERATORS OF THRU TRAFFIC
-Existing Dwelling Unit Construction and Vacant Land Study:
Dwelling Unit' • .1971 Vacant Land in Urban
Construction for Residential Use
• 1969 1971 % Increased R.S. RM or CV
Zone I - 446 510 14. 3% 202 ac. 3 ac.
Zone II 1137 1254 10. 2 543 1
Zone III 470 491 4.4 64 7
Zone IV 1003 1042 3. 8 12 1
Zone V 124 126 1 .6 66 0 .
3180 3423 6 .9% ay. 887 ac. 12 ac .
Estimated Dwelling Unit Count in 1980 :
No. of D. U. ' s
Increase/Yr . • Increase/Yr. 1980 Est . D.U.
Zone I 5% 25 x 9 = 225 735
Zone II 5 60 x 9 = 540 1790
Zone III 2 10 x 9 = 90 580
Zone IV 4* 40 x 9 = 360 1540
Zone V 500** 630
Zone VI
5275 I
1/ Study area projection
Apts . for 50% UH Students - 2500 @ 2/DU = 1500 units
Apt. Zoning - 20-,acres = 300
1800 units
•
* Assumed certain areas developed as multi-family.
i ** Maximum Development of housing in State Land including elder_v
and subsidized housing.
APPENDIX B
r
411
•
TRAFFIC GENERATORS BY DWELLING UNITS
BY ZONES IN 1980
Estimated Local* =-20% 80%
Daily Traffic Total Puna Bound • Town Bound
Zone I 735 x 7 trips/DU 5145 1030 4115
Zone II 1790 x 7 12530 2500 10030
Zone III 580 .x 7 4060_ , 800 3260
Zone • IV 1540 x 7 - 10780 2160 8620
Zone V 630 x 4** . .2520 500 2020
* Within Zone
** Lowered to accommodate elderly housing.
APPENDIX B
110 411
TRAFFIC ANALYSES OF
ALTERNATE HIGH SCHOOL SITES -
This report was prepared in response to the Department of Education's concern
over possible traffic congestion occurring from the construction of a second
high school-. Figure 1 shows the four alternate sites considered in this •
report.
•
In selecting a school site, we feeithat the major traffic factor to be con-
sidered is whether projected traffic volumes can be adequately accommodated
by planned roadways and that the degree of congestion should have very little
emphasis. Our analysis of Site #1, Kawili Site, therefore does not stress;
the degree of congestion nor does it compare traffic flows with the other
alternate sites. Rather, we have looked at traffic patterns and projecteri
traffic volumes and have analyzed these in .terms of whether the' patterns can
accommodate the volumes. We have also listed some considerations that coild
possibly improve traffic flow and promote traffic safety.
Unlike Site #1, where the surrounding streets are developed and a schemat'_c
of the school is available, Sites i2, #3 and 114 are only marks on the map .
New streets will he developed, accesses must be determined, and di.stricti.lg
changed. In this regard, we have not conducted any detailed studies due
lack of information. We have instead listed considerations and requirements
to look into should a detailed study be required.
® •
SECTION A - ANALYSIS OF SITE #i1 - KAWILI SITE
I. BACKGROUND DATA
A. Data Used
1. Per coordination with Planning Department
a. Dwelling units
b. Enrollment figures
c. Alternate sites
2. Traffic volume counts by the Department of Public Works
3. Charts from Highway Capacity Manual
4. "Morning Peak Hour Study" for Hilo High School
by William C. Hong, consulting engineer
B. Factors Utilized
1. Transportation of students
a. 30% by school bus
b. 10% will walk
c. 30% on vehicles to remain (parked)
d. 30% on vehicles that are passing thru (unloading)
2. Vehicle loads
a. 2 Students arrive per parked vehicle 0
b. 1-1/2 students arrive per unloading vehicle
c. 40 students arrive per bus
II. STUDY RESULTS
A. Existing Traffic Counts .
See Figure 2
B. Traffic Generated by the Second High School or Hilo College that
Has Kawili Street as its Destination
•
See Figure 3 .. . .
C. Projected 1980 Traffic Assignments
See Figure 4 0
-2-
• 110
D. Capacity Analyses •
Volume counts are low except during the morning peak hour on school
days. We have therefore analyzed the traffic patterns for this peak-
hour only. Capacity and volume counts are shown in Figure 5.
1. Definitions ••
a. Peak-Hour Volume (PHV) - The highest number of vehicles that
• pass over a section of a roadway during 60 consecutive minutes.
b. Maximum Capacity (MC) - The maximum number of vehicles which,
has a reasonable expectation of passing over a given section
of a roadway in one directi_o:-iduring a given time period under
prevailing roadway and traffic conditions.
c. Desired Capacity (DC) - Capacity at which stable operation
occurs and which is usually used in urban design practice.
This level produces some waiting periods and back-up conditions.
Most drivers feel somewhat restricted but not objectionably so.
d. % Assigned (%A) - Percentage of time needed to pass a certain
capacity.
2. Comparisons to be Made`.`
a. MC .versus PHV
If PHV is greater than MC, the intersection is overloaded and
conditions must be altered.
h. DC versus PHV
If DC is equal to or greater than PHV, traffic flow is accept-
able.
3. Conditions Analyzed •
a. Existing volumes with existing roads •
b. 1980 volumes with existing roads
' c. 1980 volumes with minimum improved roads
III. DISCUSSION
A. Capacity Analyses (Figure 5)
1. Existing Conditions
Three key intersections leading to the 2nd high school were analyzed.
The Puainako Street approach to the Kinoole-Puainako intersection
•
-3-
L
. • . 1
•
•
is the only section where the PBV (648) is greater than the
DC (586) . This concurs with field observations of traffic
back-up on Puainako Street.
2. 1980 Traffic Projections
•
• The existing intersections were analyzed utilizing volume counts
projected for 1980. For all three intersections, the projected
volumes were lower than maximum capacity but greater than desired
capacity. The major problem area is the same approach listed in
paragraph 1.
3. Street Improvements
•
The 1980 volume counts were analyzed utilizing a 40-foot payment
widening along Kinoole Street and right turn lanes on Iwalan'.
Street. With these improvements, traffic flows fall into the
acceptable category.
•
B. Improvements
1. Planned
a. Puainako Street widening and/or relocation by the State
b. Kinoole Street widening from Mohouli to Olona Streets by
County.
• 2. Desired in Near Future
•
a.
. Widen section of Kapiolani Street at Lanikaula Street
b. Widen Kawili Street between Kinoole Street and Kilauea Avenue
• c. Install street lights along P.awili Street to facilitate night
school functions and auditorium use
d. Provide pedestrian and/or bicycle pathways along Kinoole •
Street, Kawili Street, and Lanikaula Street
e. Kinoole Street widening from Olona to 1000 ft. Puna of
Puainako Street
•
. 3. To be Considered
a. Third lane for. turns on Kawili Street
•
b. Traffic signal systems
(1) Along Puainako St. at P.awili, Kinoole and Kilauea
(2) Along Kawili St. at Kapiolani, Kinoole and Kilauea
-4-
110
C. Desired with School Complexes
1. Hilo College
a. Sufficient covered unloading• area off Kapiolani Street, or
preferably Lanikaula Street.
b. Parking areas with entrances on Lanikaula and Kapiolani Streets.
c. Controlled, selected access'- s from Kawili Street onto parking
areas.
d. Sufficient off-street parking area for dorm residents and
- visitors.
e. Pedestrian and bicycle paths connecting dorms directly to
main campus to provide bypass route in lieu of 'using Kawili
Street.
f. Provide lighting for parking area and internal streets.
g. Plan for bus stop for County Bus System.
2. High School (DOE)
a. Sufficient covered unloading area to accommodate 300 vehicles
in the morning peak.
b. Separate loading zones to accommodate buses.
c. Main asphalt area fronting buildings be used for unloading
•
zones and reserved parking for staff, visitors, library users
and some students. •
•
d. Separate parking area be developed with separate access for
bulk of student parking. Possible site is area between athletic
fields and school buildings. In this manner, site would be
•
close to classrooms so students will use and also could be
• used during athletic events.
e. Provide lighting for parking area and internal streets.
•
f. Provide connection from intermediate school to the high school
as a bypass route to utilization of the Puainako-Kawili
intersection. •
g. Plan for bus stop for County Bus System.
h. Revise intermediate school traffic pattern.
•
-5-
411
D. . Other Considerations
•
1. Staggered Hours
The use of staggered starting times will spread out the peak period
instead of having a concentratirn at 7:40. One possible suggestion
is:
7:30 Hilo College
7:50 Elementary •
8:00 Intermediate
8:10 High School
•
2. Promote County Bus System
•
Should a County Bus System.be implemented, routes to Hilo College
and the high school should be provided. This would provide an
alternate means for student arrivals, especially for Hilo College,
and decrease the traffic volume.
• IV. CONCLUSIONS
A. Effect of. Second High School
1. There will be little net effect on the present traffic problem at
the Puainako-Kinoole intersection. The second high school would
increase thru traffic on Kinoole Street hut should re-route some
traffic from Puainako Street onto Kawili Street.
2. The total peak-hour traffic on Kawili Street will increase from
the present volume of 276 vehicJ_es to 880 vehicles. The inter-
sections of Kawili Street with Puainako, Kapiolani and Kinoole
would be taxed but will have sufficient capacity to handle. the
traffic. With additional improvements, the volume-capacity ratio
would fall within the acceptable range.
3. The construction of the high school could be the vehicle to provide
improved patterns at the intermediate and elementary schools through
a proposed connecting roadway.
4. Implementation of the staggered starting hours will spread out the
concentration period and facilitate traffic movement.
B. Hilo College and the Department of Education must provide:
1. Adequate off-street parking.
2. 'Adequate student unloading area.
•
3. Controlled and coordinated accesses.
4. Coordination with other agencies for the funding and programming
of needed improvements; e.g. , street lights, street widening, sewers
and drainage.
-6--
• 4
• SECTION B - ANALYSES OF SITES NOS. 2, 3 AND 4
I. BACKGROUND DATA
The basic factors derived in Section A are used for all sites. After
deducting those volumes generated by Hilo College, the following have been
set as preliminary traffic input data:
•
1. Peak-hour volume generated by the high school is 650 vehicles.
2. 450 Parking stalls should be provided on campus.
3. A covered unloading area capable of handling 320 vehicles each
moFming is required.
The analyses of the sites assumes that the parking and unloading require-
ments will be met and therefore would not be a problem.
II. ANALYSIS CF SITE #2 - HAIHAI-KILAUEA AREA'
A. Existing Conditions
• 1. Kilauea Street has bottlenecks on both ends - a one-way pattern at
the Keaau end and a one-lane bridge near Haihai Street.
•
2. Haihai Street is a substandard street that is destined to be a major
east-west connector highway.
3. There are four side streets leading to the school site off Haihai
Street: (1) Aloalo Street; (2) Hiluhi_lu Street; (3) Hauoli Street;
(4) Kupaa Street. These are narrow streets with minimal connec-
tions onto HaihaiStreet.
B. Discussion
The areas along Haihai Street are being developed and traffic volumes
will increase. The narrow existing streets will not be able to accom-
modate the expected volumes. Considerations should be Oven to the
following in connection ,with developing school plans:
1. Widen the narrow bridge on .Kilauea Street.
2. Improve Haihai Street.
3. Improve the Haihai-Kinoole and Haihai-Kilauea Avenue intersections.
4. Channelize the intersection of Kilauea Avenue with the Connector
Road to the Belt Highway. The access road could be located directly
across this connector road to form a typical cross intersection.
•
-7--
--
• • •
•
5. A secondary access off one of the side streets would lessen the
volume along Kilauea Avenue.
C. Conclusion
No existing streets will provide the necessary capacity to handle the
projected volumes. Kilauea Avenue must be improved by widening the
narrow bridge and improving its intersection with Haihai Street.
III. ANALYSIS O1 SITE #3 - PANAEWA SITE
A. Existing Conditions
The site is undeveloped. The Hawaii Belt Road is a four-lane divided
highway and has ample capacity.
B. Discussion .
Traffic problems would include the internal patterns and the connection
to the State Highway. Coordination with and approval from the State •
Department of Transportation is required. Storage turning lanes are
desirable, especially for the outbound lanes.
C., Conclusion
No problems foreseen. It would be desirable to have storage turning
lanes constructed. Early coordination with the State Department of
Transportation is recommended'.
IV. ANALYSIS OF SITE ##4 - KOMOHANA SITE
A. Existing Conditions
1. Komohana Street is a high capacity, paved, two-lane, undivided
street with adequate shoulders-.
2. Plans for the Ainako-Mohouli Extension are underway.
3. Area is undeveloped.
B. Discussion
Komohana Street is the major mauka thru street that connects Waianuenue
Avenue to the Waiakea Homesteads area. Storage turning lanes will be
required for any access road and also at Mohouli Street. •
The Ainako-Mohouli Street Extension will be a heavily used connector
street. Storage turning lanes would he a desirous feature should an
access be provided off this street. Possibly two accesses, one off
Komohana and one off Mohouli, would be more advantageous in that it
would divide the concentration.
•
-8-
410
•
C. Conclusion
Left-turning traffic will create delays and hack-ups along either
Komohana and/or Mohouli Street. To keep traffic flowing, adequate
left-turning lanes must be provided at the school access road and at
Mohouli Street.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
-9-
----xenewiligiir
•
•
•
•
•
•
OSS 1
' .\ „ . .
.4% .r.--- ........,., .
____________j, =,-. ' ov . '‘ Al - • ' ,i‘:. , ' if 1-----
61- -;> --,-1/4.%
7.__.___ •,-Q / si.v ..' r‘ 01-;,....-----"------. .- - .
/ '' / 1
•
1 /fiYi
...,...7._ ...e„,,,....: .....7......:±.:„<„:„...... ............)_i_
"•-..,, 'N.:7.'4'. %I'''N.,,,, . / /
•
.. - 77/
•.„,
i -----7----,–r-----,--
__,
c
_—fir.' ,...,....1"-:-%,-
1 �6 . .
II.9 •�6� � L
... . ,
10,40..,,d,r,. .
. . .
1, 4..4. . ‘111011 . • . ;
, J
S ', \\a-
<>. \--`"--1-•\�ti j•, ,~ / - •
dLdC7a'. .G 7_,we,
...../...,-,...i&-,,,-
•
\.mac ''''./.';',/7/4/:////
- -
''''::
•
, 7
6�<. ,��t t • \mow♦ �1//�/ •
,
�4 /` �� •
\``\\ \ sa°i \\\� / ,rte ,///2 p ,�(1/`,.Pf ` C
•
. . - it n•
ll . ' ji
--p . .
. i
4k114 " - ' - - ' • •
, ,i;
a
I
: '`'-.1.- i. .,4.,..... : c; '% . : . •o
1
,2 . ..
, .. .. .. .....
. ._,... .. ... . .... .......................... . . ...,...
. .
. .. • , . . . .. ,
• .. .. . .„.
. . ..
. .• . .
. . . . ..
. .
.... _
. , .. . .
..„ , ,,.. ......
... ,
.1-:�: I- .'775-1"—:.,11-1 C '1----:--7.- --.N.V- 1-1(-')t____1 .c. \/C ) l_1.___J i'`-I -=-
----
. 3C446:1 ; )6C5-0-7---
'
-f-.G
-f--G
-9 ,
i j�\ G
i•
- :oMof/z,NA JT \
. N ,:\v\\ N- -\\-'
‘,. \
\ •
, N\
,-, ,N N „,•N..,, .\ \ ,\ ,\\. ,\\ \\N ,
\ \. NN.. „\,.\ ,,,,.. \ \\ \\ \\, ,,,,, \ \
,,, \s... -\:\N\-\ N\
\ ,\\,,. _,.‘ .
. : _4__ .N .‘ ,.\\,,N.,\N \--\
\._. ....... .,
. .,, N. ... \\ \ \ \ P
\ . •
\\ \\ PROPOSED L/!N' \ \, l'-" ,iF���
r
I '-i--> ` \\ • \\\ ` \ \ \ \ �// \ . P°"°
ro 0
\\N
N \ N 0
•-.. .
•\\\\\\\\N. x 000 \`\ \\\\ �l • \`
188 276 \ \ \ , \NN • ' I-,-
•
�\-N,NN , -, - • \‘`..• ,\. N. \.--..-• / • 4 c...„ c
\ \te.
•
x°193 \ - \`-r -,--•222 s.<,•, ti"/1/ER17-v . `,
\\ \\ '\ , '‘.,4„:‘,,:\::,,.\\ OF •\\ \ G\,
- 270 \.;\ 270 '\, HAW/SW •\\� \\ \
'r5R1,1 D/ATE, •, \\\ \ 1 \
6 70 SCN004 \�\,\\ PF, \\\, \\ \ ,n N-
I \ \` \ PROPOSED •%'\. PT 'F � \
\\\\. \ z Nim \\ .a-, 2� ,•
.. o
_ \ . \`,„ \\\ .5c7 002_ \"i\ V�1 G il \\
\.,, ,, ,„,.....„
. , ,,, ,..,
\\., „\\
. .,, ,,,i
.N.‘,..,.. .\\. ..\ \ ,,,, ,,,,.,,,.,,, s
• ,
. ,, ,,,\ A, N \N-N\''\--,- \. \. ::\-\, oSN''' ( -55'\'' c' .
I ...,,, .4,,,,,,„\\....‘ . ,\\,,, . ..,.. .„,,,,,, ,
\‘:.:\____„• .
384 419
1'1..803°\,N, \- --.' 1 2h ,�gc
•
399 -- '� `` `
434' _� - (gyp kf5If' qOf�l. 74,40}''//67
--1----1 -1, lam'F-/` C]9 2.: ��; I / ,E J
:z44 •264. • 508' .
f=I Ci L-.1 IZ.ff . G
L .
|
• �
.. }
•
d\
• '� --_
'
IKSc:-.# \�' p)
��
8l 't) . 2 .-
./...'---------
*' K/
•
uy /^ r�' — /
�- ~ �0 L93
' '-J �N�'0, k
'
•
' `� \VIOL� ~
�� � '
' - / '
/l ' /
\ u��� . 7
.
�
' i =
\.^
/�/
/
�f '
|' - 7 T , � /
'\ - • / / •
\) J � / '\ - •
`, - / �`
\ J . ' .\
/' / ,
' J N '
- • !. /.. �' / /
• /|
U/ |
/ .
]- '
• /
- • `
•
�
T' �' /
� � //
, / 7 // 7
� [` i /
!
/ _ ; ' � ' • // ,
| �- � ' ;A., \
-1 \
| �//' ' / 7
' � / ' / / / ' / / / _�� '
. � , /�/ // • / \ \
- m / /71 ~ ` |
' •
o] ! ' ,
�� \
/
Cr)0q //�/ / /'//' //' ../.? �m /' /~//� / |
/ / ,/ // ' // ' /'/'/ /,',//�'///,' ' 'f/ / � / ' �
-----' � �� ux^�v�n� /
| i 1.,|_ � __|_ -U ____�__U-___U--J�-s���--'---�------- - -\��� -1 lJ ' �--� U `' || �, *-� . ^�,_ � . `
� � - _-____ ` �
/ ' . •� ��
` � .
.
.
^�
- ! 8 c I�r --i L=-__C.2-7 I cI'—iti
-�
aciitc:i=iono, r-�- •
•
*L
/�✓� 9G
i
•
dam% \ `��.
\\\ \\ \\.\`�\\ '.\ \\\ \ X
\\ \\
\\ \\.\\::\:\.\\N
.\\\\\\ \�\ ` • p
\\ \, \\ `• \\\ \ \. ..,,t/Kg, v
Il,
i Tao•.N,'N.-,\\-,,
(c'\
' \"..\-C-
•
400 300 \ \ \ \ \\\\\
\\ \ \ \ ` \\.\' 1: \ \\s
1 NN.N\\N N\ \\,.. 'N\ •-,\N. N . . \\ - -
.• 1 30 ��AN,G. \
11.80 �-_-�-�- 80 \, \ \ -\N` \ " \
3)\I\'\ ''' \- — 600 \ rjn/1ER. /TY \
i \ \,N \ \ \' of \`. `.\•\ a�\
: . , ‘ \\-\\\\, .\-\\ ., \\\\
300 1400 'd;tl�EtP\\ ` \N N \ \\\\ \\\`N \ \ a
700 tNTER(SEDI rE, \\\ \2\.N., \,�
N'- '_,-)0 \
E4i/4ENrARY \\ .. \ •
1 n \\SCHOOL \\\\\;\\\- /4' t•) \ �p}'\ \\
1 •
\\\ PROF�OSED � ja\ \•$,
\Ill
....\ \\`\ �G' N/Gtr . \' . aE>'0 �G� .
•
t \--------
NN,
_, ., .. .,,,, ., ..„
,,„
, , , \ . 0 ,
•
.,
. .
x \ \ \„„: \o,,,„
6 _s, ,. `,
... ..... •,. . .
.bra \\\\\ .
\ 1
400 450' \ . '�'1
I
r X50 ��'
r 55 C �`� HiCH.
L
I • ® . . .
CAPACITY ANALYSES
Intersection - PUAINAKO-KAWILI KINOOLE-PUAINAKO KINOOLE-KAWILI 1
Street - Puainako Kawili KThoole Puainako Kinoole Kawili
STREET ANALYSES
1. Maximum Capacity 1,320 1,700 1,372 1,357 1,993 1,696
2. Desired Capacity 1,056 1,360 1,098 1,086 1,594 1,357
INTERSECTION ANALYSES
A. EXISTING -
1. Peak-Hour Volume 592 246 508 648 564 258
2. Maximum Capacity 594 935 508 • 855 564 1,221
@ % Assignment 45% 55% 37% ' 63% 28% 72%
.3. Desired Capacity - 592 598 508 586 546 882 !
@ %_Assignment 156% 44% 45% 54% 35% 65%
B. 1980 PROJECTION
1. Peak-Hour Volume ! 720 490 640 700 750 750
2. Maximum Capacity 720 765 640 719 750 1,051
@ % Assignment 55% 45% 47% 53% 38% 62%
3. Desired Capacity 720 435 640 456 750 ' .719
@ % Assignment 168% 32% 58% 42% 47% 53%
I
C. INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
k-H Volume N.A.. Pea our . ,
1 N.A. N.A.
Less Right Turns ! --. 441 493 -- 675 --
-- --
a. Max. Capacity 493
89'6 675 1,119
@ % Assignment 36% 64% 34% 66%
b. Desired Capacity; -- -- 493 597 . 675 787
@ % Assignment 45% 55% 42% 58%
I
2. Peak-Hour Volume j
Less Left Turns 1 -- • -- 384 700 --
a. Desired Capacity -- -- 384 706 -- -
@ % Assignment 35% 65% }
v FIGURE 5
Ill
410
TRAFFIC SUMMARY
A detailed study of Site 111 was made since schematics were available and local
streets in the area are already developed. The remaining three sites are in
undeveloped areas where meaningful data is unobtainable. Accesses to the sites
• are undetermined, zoning and districting changes are required, and new streets
will be constructed. Therefore, only a general overall analysis was made of
• Sites 462, #3, and #4.
•
It is assumed ghat the Department of Education will provide, adequate parking
and unloading areas on campus and therefore our studies conTerned itself with
traffic on pub'.ic streets and accesses to the school sites.
•
SITE #1 - KAWILI STREET SITE
The traffic congestion at the Puainako-Kinoole Street intersection will remain .
about the same. The intersections along Kawili Street at Puainako, Kapiolani,
and Kinoole Streets will be taxed but there is sufficient capacity available
to handle the volume. This would be a congested condition with delays and
back-ups. With street improvements and staggered hours, the volume/capacity
ratio would fall out of the congestion range and into an acceptable range.
SITE 112 - HAIHII--KILAUEA AREA
The existing streets in this undeveloped area are substandard. There is no
adequate access unless Kilauea Avenue is improved by widening ,the narrow
bridge and by improving its intersection with Haihai Street.
SITE #3 PANAWA SITE
The major problem is to provide an adequate access off the Belt Highway. It
would be desirable if storage turning lanes could be provided. 'Early coordina-
tion with the .State Department of Transportation is recommended.
SITE #4 - KOMOI-HANA SITE
Komohaiia Street is the major mauka thru street. Any left-turning movements
off this street would cause back-ups. Storage turning lanes should be provided
along Komohana at the access road and at Mohouli Street.
•
L_ . _
' BUREAUS AND DIVISIONS-
AUTOMOTIVE EQUIPMENT & MOTOR POOL
MAYOR BUILDING CONSTRUCTION AND INSPECTION
I ♦Rr� �lb PLANS AND SURVEYS
+' /LI*I ROAD CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
SEWERS AND SANITATION
N TRAFFIC SAFETY AND CONTROL
EDWARD K. HARADA ° "� `�•�• ,w'
CHILI, ENGINEER ^• ..��1
COUNTY OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
25 AUPUNI STREET
HILO. HAWAII 95720
October 20, 197E
Mr. Charles L. Schuster
District Engineer
State Highways Division
P. O. Box 276
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
Enclosed is a copy of Rec. 5/PWC-65 from the County Council
requesting the possibility of having an edge-of-pavement stripe
painted along the Puna side of Puainako Street.
Would you please investigate this request and inform the County
Council of the results.
- "eefjlttAlk- r: ,��, , ,/t,�
EDWARD }IARADA
Chief Engineer
cc: e7County Clerk (Re: • Rec.5/PWC-65)