Make developer post traffic bond
The revised Turtle Bay development proposal does not address the potential for traffic congestion and the cost to relieve it ("Turtle Bay owners scale back expansion," Star-Advertiser, Aug. 23).
If the new supplemental environmental impact statement projects little or no negative traffic effect, and this proves to be wrong, who is left to pay for fixing the problem?
The taxpayers. Us.
The developers will have sold their property, taken their profits, and moved on.
My suggestion is that if a new development is to be approved for the Turtle Bay area, the developers should be required to provide $100 million to be held in an escrow account for 10 years.
If the EIS is correct and at the end of the 10 years there has been no significant impact on road infrastructure, then the escrow funds would be released to the developers.
If the EIS is wrong, we, the taxpayers, will have funds to use to fix the problem caused by the development.
Bill Quinlan
Velzyland
Rail critics short on alternatives
So what do the experts, Walter Heen, Ben Cayeta-no, Cliff Slater and Randy Roth, recommend to improve traffic ("How the city misled the public," Star-Advertiser, Aug. 21)?
What alternatives do they suggest?
Make the rail into another elevated freeway?
If they have a really good (better) idea, I’m ready to listen, but I didn’t see one put forth in the article.
I live in Kailua and the H-3 freeway has certainly improved my commute to Pearl Harbor while probably easing commuter traffic into Honolulu, too.
Yes, the rail will probably cost much more than expected and take longer than projected. Inflation is here already. Look at the rate increases for water and electricity in the pipeline and the cost of food and gasoline.
I don’t necessarily agree with many things about this project, but get on with it. I have listened to the negativism for years and years.
Peyton Rowan
Kailua
If rail is built, we’ll regret it
Reading "How the city misled the public" (Star-Advertiser, Aug. 21) I think of the 30-year effort in San Francisco to build and then demolish the Embarcadero Freeway and the current controversy in Seattle between digging a deep-bore tunnel or developing ST5 (street/transit/ I5) to replace the 1950s Alaskan Way Viaduct.
On Oahu it seems clear that once we build the heavy train rail transit system ("aircraft carriers in the sky"), we will then spend the next 50 years trying to figure out a way to tear it down.
Jay Voss
Honolulu
Overpopulation ruining Hawaii
The recent supplement, "Growing Hawaii" (Star-Advertiser, July 31), is enough to terrify a thoughtful Oahu resident.
Where will the water come from for those many hundreds of homes?
Where will the garbage be taken?
How can the loss of good agricultural land be justified — once gone, it is gone forever.
Why are new malls needed when so many empty shops abound throughout the island?
How can the increased traffic on our highways possibly be tolerated?
Mindless building for the sake of jobs and/or lining developers’ pockets is no answer to anything and will lead to reduced quality of life for most of us.
Control of population and limitation of family size would eventually ease all these problems and elevate the quality of life for all.
Margaret B. Murchison
Honolulu
Let job creators do what they do
A haunting melody — jobs, jobs, jobs.
President Barack Obama says that he now plans to focus on jobs.
Wow!
In his first address to Congress in February 2009, Obama promised an agenda focusing on job creation. That’s two years ago and he keeps repeating this refrain.
The unemployment rate is 9.1 percent — and that’s not including those who have given up looking for a job or filing for unemployment compensation.
Obama took a bus tour through swing states. Will it create jobs or is it a re-election jaunt at taxpayers’ expense?
He needs to be a leader as president and not a campaigner for the job. He is president now.
Please, no more stimulus plans. Get off the job creators’ backs and let them show you how to lead and create jobs.
Tom Fragas
Kailua
