• How about peacocks in paradise? • One-lane bridge data • Keep the ideas coming • About the multi-use path How about peacocks in paradise? It amuses me how people whose freezers are stuffed with chickens can at the same
• How about peacocks in paradise?
• One-lane bridge data • Keep the
ideas coming • About the multi-use
path
How about peacocks in paradise?
It amuses me how people whose freezers are stuffed with chickens can at the same time tolerate the noise of them screeching outside their homes like recurrent car alarms.
It would appear to be an excellent idea to cull some of the roosters and gradually replace them with peacocks — whose beauty and resplendence would truly reflect the image of our tranquil Island paradise.
Philip Stevens, Hanalei
One-lane bridge data
The Jan. 25 Letter to the Editor of Evelyn de Buhr on Hanalei’s one-lane bridges may well reflect the views of some in that area, but her misstatements about the issues expressed in Walter Lewis’ Jan. 21 article, “A Better Kaua‘i,” were irresponsible and illustrate a prejudice that the Hanalei area should remain separate from the rest of Kaua‘i and in its own sleepy dream world.
Lewis’ article considered three bridges in the Kapa‘a area, which are in urgent need of renovation or repair, and his only mention of any other bridge was in the context of citing safety data for Kaua‘i one-lane bridges and noting that the one-lane bridge across the Hanalei river had the highest accident rate of any bridge in the county. Ms. de Buhr is sadly amiss in speculating about Mr. Lewis’ possible views on the Hanalei corridor bridges. In my view, Mr. Lewis properly concluded that while historic significance might justifiably be considered, safety and traffic efficiency were the most important factors for bridge planning.
If she wishes to fact check the 2-to-1 accident ratio of one-lane bridges over two that Lewis references — and which she and some others including a councilwoman question — I would suggest that she call our state Traffic Engineers office at 692-7684 and talk to Alvin Takeshita, who supplied this information. I would be happy to supply Ms. de Buhr with a copy of the letter from Mr. Takeshita supporting the figures that Lewis states.
In fact, Mr. Takeshita has recently sent me up-to-date figures that support his earlier data. I have no idea where Ms. de Buhr’s road committee get their numbers, but most of us will accept the neutral traffic engineers’ data, which has been verified by KPD.
Another myth perpetrated by Ms. de Buhr is that these one-lane bridges are “calming” devices that prevent accidents and slow traffic down. At a recent meeting regarding these bridges, a KPD sergeant said that speed humps are the method being successfully used to slow traffic down, not one-lane bridges.
The bottom line is that there are a limited few people who seem to feel that historic considerations are really more important than facts that show safety is compromised by them. Those of us who live in the real world recognize that there is nothing more important than the safety of the driver and their family.
Glenn Mickens, Kapa‘a
Keep the ideas coming
Anytime someone has an idea to better Kaua‘i, others will comprehend it as if that person doesn’t like it here. Quite the contrary, the person giving the feedback only wants to help better the situation.
Why is it when someone has an idea that doesn’t fit another’s agenda, evidently someone will tell them to move? Someone may say, “I want more roads,” and the response would be, “If you don’t like it here, move back to where you came from.”
A person might say, “A ferry boat sounds like a good idea,” and the response might be, “Ferry boats only bring drug dealers and the homeless, so move back to where you came from.”
Someone may say, “The marathon needs to be privately sponsored in lieu of being taxpayer-subsidized, and others will say, “Go back to where you came from if you aren’t happy here.” Someone may even say, “We need a new bridge,” and others will call you a four-letter name and tell you to go back to where you came from.
Here’s an idea for everyone. Why not stay right where you are, and keep your ideas coming to help make our cosmic hamlet of an island all it can be.
Who knows? Your feedback may someday become a reality that helps us all.
James “Kimo” Rosen, Kapa‘a
About the multi-use path
Mr. Ritch’s letter, “Bicycle path history” (Letters: Jan. 22) needs to read my letter, “Alternatives to multi-use path” (Letters: Jan. 18) again.
I did not suggest that the path on Waimea Canyon Drive should go straight up for 1,500 feet at the one-mile gap. I simply said, since walkers, joggers and cyclists already hike, jog or bike up the road, why not build the path alongside, following the road up to a mile?
Build a rest stop at that point to view the scenery of the beautiful coastline from Kaumakani to Kekaha. Then continue the path alongside the road for another five to six miles and, at that point, cross over to Kokee Road.”
I drive on Kokee Road and Waimea Canyon Drive five days a week and I observed that before the junction of Route 552 and Route 554 (the “Y” in the road), there is approximately half a mile of undeveloped level land that makes it possible to cross over between both roads. There is no 1,500-foot gap there.
Actually, my first choice is to use taxpayer money to build alternative roads or a new highway with bridges along the foothills one stretch at a time.
There are a lot of old cane haul roads from Mana to Kilauea or farther.
Howard Tolbe, ‘Ele‘ele
