Few places illustrate the principle of limited resources the way the North Shore does. Its roads and beaches can bear only so much traffic, and yet everyone wants to be there. The two-lane Kamehameha Highway provides the only route in and out of the popular region, so vehicles move slowly at best.
Imagine the frustration of those drivers when beachgoers intent on crossing to the beach side hold up traffic at will, scurrying across without any controls or safeguards.
This is the experience of visitors to the zone surrounding Laniakea Beach — a spot also known as "Turtle Beach" because of its views of the creatures — about three miles north of Haleiwa Beach Park. The highway skirts the shoreline so closely that the only space for parking is on the mauka side of the road, leaving visitors to run across and hold up traffic — and, of course, put their own lives at risk.
This problem has persisted for several years, with little more than dithering in response. But with crowds growing, the critique has grown louder and sharper, and the result should be that state transportation officials finally put short- and long-term solutions in the pipeline.
There have been efforts to fund a search for solutions in that area, said Caroline Sluyter, spokeswoman for the Department of Transportation. This first lapsed in 2009, and when a new appropriation for $1.7 million was made, the focus switched to studying a realignment of the highway, largely because of ocean erosion undermining the roadbed. The project was tabled before that grant was ever spent, she said.
The realignment seems to provide the most sensible, permanent answer. Moving a stretch of roadway inland would protect it from erosion — a compelling public-safety concern — and also provide room on the makai side to park, eliminating the need for visitors to run across the road.
But the community pushed back against the project, Sluyter said, because it wanted more immediate traffic relief, not a long-term highway project. Nevertheless, the state needs to push ahead on both fronts.
The current plan is to block parking on the mauka side of the highway in the area. That’s worth a try, because there’s little public cost, and any obstacle to discourage stoppers would be welcome. But unless some parking is provided on the makai side, the barriers might just push the problem down the road, where turtle-seekers will cross the road anyway.
Another proposal, to create a parking lot on the mauka side with a single entrance and exit, was envisioned as a way to limit the crossings to one point, a marked crosswalk. But the land is owned by both the state and the city, and failure to come to terms over liability killed that idea, Sluyter said.
There have been other suggestions. One, from state Rep. Richard Fale, is to use the nearby stream bridge as an underpass. The stream bed is usually dry, providing a sandy passageway to the beach. However, clearly the state could not recommend this to visitors for liability reasons. It would not be passable by anyone with a disability, and in inclement weather you can’t count on beachgoers to use common sense and avoid the area.
What’s most disconcerting is that absolutely nothing has been done about the growing problem over the course of a half-dozen years. Various disputes and changes in city and state administration present some hurdles but not insurmountable ones. The turtles themselves could have moved more quickly toward a solution by now.
