Column: Laniakea barriers’ removal well-intended but bad for safety

For 15 long years, North Shore residents have predicted that someone would be killed at Laniakea. On Aug. 1, it nearly happened. A 10-year old boy was hit, thrown 10 to 15 feet and hospitalized with serious injuries. It is only a matter of time before an even worse tragedy happens at Lani­akea.

Area residents were afforded a respite from the dangerous mix of tourists and traffic in December 2013 when the state Department of Transportation (DOT) placed barriers on the mauka side of the highway. Traffic flowed. People resorted to parking on either end of the barriers, and without the direct view of the water, were much less likely to dart into traffic. This reverted back to chaos when the court ordered the barriers removed in mid-2015 as a result of a lawsuit filed by The Save Laniakea Coalition and five individuals.

The Surfrider Foundation called the DOT’s efforts “misguided” and claimed its coalition was able to restore parking and beach access to the area. Ironically, for the year and a half that the barriers were in place, beach access complaints were rare. Most surfers were unaffected by the barriers and motorists were grateful for the blessed relief.

While we can appreciate the effort to ensure public access to our parks and beaches, the situation at Laniakea is unique. First, the public park is a park in name only. It is undeveloped pastureland.

Secondly, there was never any obstruction to gaining beach access unless you consider not finding a close parking space an obstruction. In short, the lawsuit did not really benefit the community and, in fact, barrier removal heightened the danger.

DOT issued a statement that the barriers would have prevented the recent accident from happening. That must be difficult for the parents of the 10-year-old boy to comprehend. The plaintiffs’ attorney reacted defensively and claims to have offered a solution. DOT maintains that any construction option would have environmental approvals and financial hurdles to overcome.

We know that there is a long road ahead to a permanent solution that satisfies everyone. But there is one course of action that can provide immediate relief. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit have the power to turn this situation around for the better by dropping the injunction against the barriers. The lawsuit has brought interagency cooperation to a halt, and it’s not worth it. The barriers would elevate safety and reduce traffic congestion immediately. Any other possible remedy will require at least two years of permitting and environmental studies, at best.

Reinstating the barriers would provide a layer of protection without a single serious negative consequence to the general public. It would also free thousands of area residents from miles of bumper-to-bumper traffic every day.

We know that the plaintiffs are as concerned as we are about the welfare of our community. We trust they also are concerned about the safety of visitors like the young boy from California who is lucky to be alive. We believe they also are compassionate enough to want to avoid the pain and suffering that would result from any more accidents at the site.

As North Shore Neighborhood Board members and grassroot representatives of our community, we advocate a cooperative approach among all stakeholders for a workable long-term solution. But let’s all do everything we can do now to make sure another injury or death does not occur at Laniakea.