Should the city expand bicycle lanes onto McCully and South streets?
-
E. No, plus remove King Street bikeway (928 Votes)
-
A. Yes, both (542 Votes)
-
D. No, status quo (163 Votes)
-
C. South Street only (44 Votes)
-
B. McCully Street only (27 Votes)
This is not a scientific poll — results reflect only the opinions of those voting.
40 responses to “Should the city expand bicycle lanes onto McCully and South streets?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Majority of motorists who uses King Street would vote to remove the cycle track. Those who do not use King Street would vote to retain it not knowing the danger the cycle track causes to bicyclists, pedestrians and motorists.
how is the cycle track a danger to motorists?
A motorist died making the left turn into Straub Clinic. She hit the wall entrance trying to avoid a bicyclist.
Wow, talk about spreading lies. Here is the truth (as reported by KHON and ALL the other news networks). Reported June 17 2015 – “An elderly woman involved in a crash on King Street Wednesday morning has died.
The Honolulu Medical Examiner’s office identified her as Charlotte Tamai, an 83-year-old woman from Honolulu.
Authorities say a medical condition caused the crash, which occurred at around 7:45 a.m. at the entrance to Straub Clinic and Hospital.
According to police, Tamai was trying to get herself to the hospital and made a left turn into the entrance from King Street.
“Crossing the bike lane, it looks like she may have passed out and subsequently clipped a bicyclist in the bike lane and then into a wall,” said Lt. Carlene Lau with the Honolulu Police Department.
Tamai was hospitalized in critical condition and later died.”
It is not dangerous at all… and has in fact made it much safer for everyone including pedestrians. Drivers are more aware of their surroundings (particularly when turning left off King St) than they have been in the past. The cycle track also adds a safety buffer between where a car turns left and when it enters the pedestrian crossing. This alone has made it much safer for pedestrians when they cross the street. People are lazy and don’t want to be bothered by looking for other things (in this case cyclists) when turning left off King Street. The effort is just too much for them to handle.
Your opinion, of course! Did you know that the city did a study on the feasibility of the cycle track for at least a year? But the study was done on the makai-side and where is the cycle track? On the Maura-side! And did you know that our mayor stated that it cost nothing to build because city employees were used?
They put it on the mauka side because of conflicts with da bus. The study was a traffic study… and to safety, the track has already proved that it has increased awareness along King Street. People drive more carefully and when they turn left they turn MUCH more cautiously than they have in the past. This determine how much traffic would be impacted with the track put in place. Funny thing is that all the city did was allow cars to park during times when they weren’t allowed to park… so basically simulating the blockage of one lane. Worked fine… traffic still flowed – everyone happy. And post-track installation study showed that it only added an average of 30-45 seconds to the commute along the entire route. As for psychological change has made it much safer for pedestrians that cross PLUS the track adds a large buffer so cars can stop before impacting a pedestrian in the crosswalk. You obviously don’t ride a bike. For the small percentage of those that do, the track has made it much, much safer. Safety is a right for everyone, not just the 95% of the population.
RWTS: point is why didn’t the city conduct the study on the Mauka-side thereby getting an accurate study? The city “admitted” that they did not account for the bus so swtched sides. And yes, Formby stated that it added just 90 seconds of drive time. What he must have done was to take it from Alakea to Isenberg but traffic is backed up into town especially from Richards Street. Formby would say anything to justify the cycle track.
Put it on Isenberg and run it to the Ala Wai and then extend to McCully.
This makes much more sense than putting it on a major corridor like McCully.
No it does not. McCully has cars parked up and down the side of the street and every single one of the “regulars” that park there have no driver-side rearview mirror. Ever wonder why? The space is far too narrow to fit a car but perfectly wide to accommodate a bike lane. It’s surprising it’s taken this long to remove those ridiculously unsafe parking stalls.
implement an annual registration fee for all bicycles – everyone should share the costs of maintaining roadways and streets.
The King Street bike path is dangerous. There are too many driveways along that stretch and bikers are speeding in the lane making visibility even worse for motorists trying to get onto or off of King.
Agree. Plus that cycle track is for 3% of bicyclists. Our mayor should try exiting one of the establishments on King Street to experience the difficulty in seeing oncoming cars and bicylists going in both directions.
So you are against providing safety for 3% of the population? It is much higher than 3%, by the way… over 10% of the population rides regularly. It’s strange how you claim the cycle track is so unsafe with your anecdotal biased “evidence”. Much like your lies about how the track already killed a person. You’ve been spreading that nonsense every time an article comes out about bike lanes. Nuff already. Fact is, the average cyclist finds that the cycle track has made King Street FAR more safe to ride on. And the numbers speak for themselves… the number of cyclists that use King Street has more than DOUBLED since the track was installed.. and that is with virtually NO feeder streets. But you obviously don’t want cyclists to even exist. Let the roads take over and forget about cyclists. Unreal.
PROVE IT BY SHOWING ME THE NUMBERS! 10%? BS!
Sheesh… no need yell. Roughly one in ten on Oahu own a bike and ride at least once a month. Most ride recreational… while only about 2% of ALL residents ride their bike to work. But did you ever think… maybe, just maybe… if there were safe places to ride a bike that the number may go up dramatically? Of course it will… and you won’t like that one bit because the future for you is nothing but cars cars and more cars clogging out streets.
Safe places to ride a bike such as the King Street cycle track? Then why are 58% of bicyclists still cycling on the sidewalks? And I supposed to be jumping up and down being stuck in traffic? Sorry but sitting in traffic partially caused by bicyclists is not something that I am happy about.
First the blatant lies about the cycle track murdering people… and now you’re stating 58% of cyclists are using the sidewalks? LOLLLLLLLL. The cycle track has removed OVER 90% of the cyclists that were riding on the sidewalks BEFORE the cycle track was built. You should be proud of that but nope… you’re anti bikes and pro cars… so anything that is good for a cyclist you’ll whine about. Nothing to see here but biased nonsense.
Taking some of the very limited space on McCully to designate bike lanes will create a very dangerous situation for vehicles and cyclists. Some parts of McCully the lanes are already narrower than the city recommends. Even though parking will be eliminated (great, less parking for residents!) the space gained by that isn’t enough for establishing standard bike lanes. Planning department, do the measurements and math – it doesn’t add up! That is a major mauka-makai route for trucks and buses. I’m not against bike lanes per se, just against trying to fit a size 10 foot into a size 8 shoe. Not enough space.
Take away parking from residents??? Brah, do you even live here and drive up and down McCully? I drive up that road daily and cars that park along the side are extremely dangerous. Drivers either smash off their driver side rear view mirrors or dangerously weave into the left lane just to avoid hitting the parked cars. All the regulars that park along McCully have no driver side rear view mirror. How unsafe is that? Buses and trucks cannot drive past these parked cars without taking up BOTH lanes. It’s absurd. An adequate bike lane takes up half the space a parking stall requires and that is basically what exists there now – half a parking stall. Yet people still park there and make driving extremely hazardous for all. Regardless of whether you are for against bike lanes, those parking stalls have got to go. And may as well convert that space into something functional and safe for cyclists.
On this, I agree with you that parking on McCully should not be allowed. The parked cars are half on the street and half on the sidewalk. As far as utilizing that parking area for a bicycle path verses widening the lanes, not sure. But a bicycle path is much better than having bicyclists ride in the middle of the lane or having them weave in between cars. Each lane “everywhere” should have a standard width.
You’re contradicting yourself… so you are for removing the stalls but against the bike lane? This clearly shows your ridiculous anti-bike lane infrastructure bias. You are against bike lane infrastructure PERIOD… even if it makes perfect sense. Why would you need to widen the lanes? By removing the parked cars, there is enough room to widen the vehicular lanes AND provide a bike lane. The bike lane is only 4 feet wide. While cars average 6 feet wide… plus being one foot from the curb (7 feet projection from the curb)… You can add 3 feet to the right lane right off the bat AND gain a bike lane. Not to mention you don’t have those rear view mirrors protruding up to another foot into the lane. So realistically, you are adding in 4 feet of extra car lanes AND a bike lane by removing those dangerous stalls. Can you tell me how this is not a win-win? Seriously, Your anti-cyclist bias is deafening and nobody is taking you seriously.
Read carefully next time. The existing lanes on McCully Street, if they meet standards for lane width, then install bicycle paths. But if the lanes do not meet standards, then widen them. If have sufficient space for bicycle paths afterwards, install them too.
I did read carefully… your comment made no sense. You said a bicycle path is much better than having cyclists ride in the middle of the lane or weave between cars… which is exactly what the bike LANE accomplishes. Bike paths are ideal… but they are much costlier to build than a bike lane… which is basically just a paint strip on the road. At least I am fiscally responsible when it comes to advocating cycling infrastructure. We don’t need to stinkeen bike paths (this ain’t Sweden)… we happy with the bike lanes. Thank you very much.
Djou was planning to get rid of the King Street bike lanes if elected mayor. YET ANOTHER missed opportunity by the I-DI-OT voters of Honolulu. But as it is, I’m going to very much enjoy watching Krook Caldwell and his failure of an administration go down in history as the worst regime to ever infest City Hall. You voted for it? You deserve the unfolding disaster that is rail. I’ll be laughing all the way to the airport as I soon relocate to a vibrant city far east of here, where city streets are lined with historic buildings, working streetlamps and colorful advertisements, rather than 50,000 crack-heads and 100,000 Micronesian, spitting red paste and begging for money.
Why weren’t we allowed to vote on this, this past election?
Bikemom said we did years ago. Reminds me of the rail project. We did not know everything about it and what it would encompass and impact.
C’mon… are you actually comparing the state’s most financially disastrous boondoggle in all history to bike lanes? We could have built bike lanes on every single street on the island for the price of ONE rail change order. Give me a break. Yes, voters support bike lanes. This Star Advertiser “Big Q” poll is shibai because the only people that actually subscribe to Star Advertiser are old grumpy people that could care less about the safety of a small subset of our population (cyclists). The majority of the public wants better bike lane infrastructure. Period.
Honolulu has the least amount of roads per capita in the nation. The King Street cycle track took away 2 precious miles. Have you figured out why we have so much traffic? Maybe you do not care about sitting in traffic but many do, which is the majority!
Well, duhh… Of course we have the least amount of roads per capita… WE LIVE ON AN ISLAND! There is no interstate commerce! Do you ever notice that in any other state there are tons of big rigs whizzing around on their major roadways? That’s because many of these trucks are carrying goods from one state to another… or are moving across multiple states to get to their final destination. We live on an island so incur ZERO interstate commerce on our roads. How is this not common sense to you? If anything, having the least roads per capita means we have the highest population density (which we do)… and this further supports the proliferation of bike lane infrastructure here. Best weather in the world… with tourism as the backbone to our economy… and the worst bike lane infrastructure in the country. What a joke. I’m here wasting time arguing with you because I actually care about the safety of our cyclists. What are you hear for? Mad about the extra 40 seconds you sit on King St every day? Unreal.
The reason why we have insufficient roads to accommodate traffic is LAND space and poor planning by government officials. And get off your high horse. You talk like you know everything. Good grief!
I don’t know everything but I have enough brain bytes to know WHY we have the least roads per capita. No. Interstate. Commerce. Simple! I think the average person can figure that out but for some reason it escapes you.
If the neigh sayers had it their way … we would still be riding horses! hahaha…
So you mean the majority?
Turning left onto King St. out of Kaiser’s is going to be in the paper some day because a bicyclist coming down against the traffic is going to get killed by a car turning right onto to King St. with the traffic.
You cannot turn right anywhere on King Street and conflict with cyclists in the cycle track… so not sure what you’re saying. If you mean the cars coming off the down ramp that dumps onto King St, that is a left turn. And it’s highly unlikely that a cyclist will die if they fly into a slow moving vehicle. It’s when cars are moving fast when they cause the most cyclist carnage. That’s why the cycle track is so safe… even if a cyclist gets hit, it’s almost impossible to occur when a car is moving at high speed. This is why the track is so safe for cyclists.
By the way, do not fall down with the pointed end of the scissors towards you. The scissors may cause you serious harm.
Nah, I only buy the blunt ones.
Remove the stupidity.