Urging The City And County Of Honolulu To Take Necessary Steps To Finalize, Prioritize, And Materialize The Makakilo Drive Extension Project.
SCR132 is a Senate Concurrent Resolution urging the City and County of Honolulu to move forward with the Makakilo Drive Extension Project. The resolution cites population growth in Makakilo and greater Kapolei as a cause of worsening traffic congestion on Makakilo Drive and Farrington Highway, and it references a 2009 environmental impact statement that found the proposed extension would not have significant adverse impacts to native species, land use, cultural resources, or public facilities. It also notes that residents and community members have advocated for the project for many years, but no extension has yet been completed.
The resolution asks the City and County of Honolulu, including the Department of Transportation Services and other appropriate agencies, to take steps to finalize, prioritize, and implement the project. It further encourages the city to establish a clear timeline covering planning updates, funding identification, design, and construction, and it requests a status report and implementation timeline be submitted to the Legislature before the 2027 Regular Session. As a concurrent resolution, SCR132 expresses legislative support and direction but does not itself change statutory law or appropriate funds.
SCR132 does not amend the Hawaii Revised Statutes or create a binding legal requirement; instead, it functions as a legislative request and policy statement directed to the City and County of Honolulu. Its practical impact is to place formal legislative pressure on local officials to advance the Makakilo Drive Extension Project, coordinate planning and funding efforts, and report progress back to the Legislature. The resolution primarily affects the City and County of Honolulu, the Department of Transportation Services, and residents of Makakilo, Kapolei, and surrounding West Oahu communities.
The overall sentiment appears supportive and pro-project. The bill’s findings emphasize traffic congestion, long-standing community advocacy, and the state’s interest in improving regional connectivity, and the measure passed both referenced Senate committees unanimously and without amendment. The committee votes suggest little opposition at the committee stage, indicating broad agreement that the project should be advanced.
The main point of contention is not reflected in recorded committee debate, but the resolution itself points to the underlying policy tension: balancing transportation relief and regional connectivity against the need to secure funding, complete design work, and move through local planning and construction processes. The bill also implicitly addresses concerns that the project has been delayed for years despite prior legislative proposals. Any resistance would likely come from questions about cost, prioritization, and implementation timing rather than from the resolution’s stated environmental findings, which it cites as reducing concern about major adverse impacts.