6 Questions for the EZWay

A past governor of the State of Hawaii sent me a half dozen questions about the EZWay Transportation Solution that I developed in collaboration with mayoral candidate Ann Kobayashi and her advisors as well as a number of local and overseas advisors. My personal responses are listed below:

(1) How will you respond to the criticism that federal funding will not be available?

The project is fully eligible for both FTA and FHWA funds. A busway fully qualifies as a "fixed guideway" by FTA definition and high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes are on priority funding for both FTA and FHWA.

The Federal Transit Administration is a strong proponent of Bus Transit and BRT in most cases is a better substitute for light rail.

(2) Does the legislature have to amend the law empowering the city to impose the 1/2% increase in the general excise tax to fund EZ-Way?

The key here is the "rail vote" on the November 4 ballot.

If the rail vote comes in favor of rail, then both candidates will likely embark on some rail route.

If the "rail vote" comes against rail, then the EZWay plan is ready for deployment or EIS. The Act calls for the "fixed guideway" and exclusive elevated bus-only lanes is a fixed guideway.

(3) Compared to Mufi's rail transit construction costs how accurate are the estimated costs for EZ-Way?

The Plan's costs are accurate. In addition to estimates I have, today I received the spreadsheet analysis from a local heavy construction estimation expert. His estimation includes a 50 ft. wide deck, railings, all drainage and lighting. The estimate for 15 miles of EZWay 3-lane guideway is $818,634,000 in 2008 dollars.

The EZWay project is 1/2 the length of rail and we maintain 1/2 of their contingency funds to cover uncertainties. This is conservative because EZWay does not have the techical complexity of rail or the total unfamiliarity of the local workforce in putting together a rail line.

(4) How do the estimated operating and maintenance costs compare for the two systems?

Throughout the nation buses in cities with rail systems carry over twice the load of passengers and cost less than half the per pax-mile cost of rail. Of course in places like LA, the contribution of light rail to total transit trips is minimal. Oahu knows how to run buses and has no clue about rail. The development of a Transit Authority will be a new and large government entity with large permanent costs in salaries, benefits and facilities. None of this is necessary for the EZWay plan.

Rail may save a few "drivers" but adds large numbers of personnel for security, rail station attendants, rail ticket inspectors, parking attendants, guideway and station maintenance crews, and a crew for the complex maintenance and storage rail yard.

Today a transit bus and its driver are stuck for 45 minutes on H-1 inbound in the morning. With EZWay, the same bus will go from Waipahu to downtown in 15 minutes, thus the same bus can do basically two or more trips instead of one. The existing TheBus fleet would be adequate if we were to deploy the system today.

5) What is the estimated cost of the so-called mini-tunnel?

If no utilities are there and require relocation and if and no iwi is found, it can be built for $50M to $75M depending on its exact configuration. If issues arise, the cost can reach the $100M to $125M range, but the Alakea and Halekauwila underpasses (collectively referred to as the downtowen mini-tunnel) would still remain a cost-effective project.

6) What is the point from which construction will begin?

Unlike the train to nowhere that will start in Kapolei and in three years it might reach Aloha Stadium (that's over two billion dollars and three years of pure waste of time and money,) the EZWay plan will reduce congestion by over 10% within three years. Basically in three years the EZWay plan will provide more congestion relief on Oahu than rail will ever do regardless of its length (10, 20 or 34 miles.)

The EZWay Plan is deployed in two phases, as follows:

For immediate traffic relief the Plan deploys the Nimitz Flyover from the Keehi junction to Pier 16. This can be built in 10 months or less and this project has an approved 1996 EIS. At the same time Phase 1 deploys the King/Beretania line of the University BRT.

The downtown underpasses need to get environmental assessment and preliminary engineering, so these two along with a few more potential underpasses are part of Phase 1. These are small localized projects costing between $15M and $50M each, so study, design and approvals can be obtained in 15 to 18 months.

Phase 2 is the "main course" which includes:

• Elevated reversible EZWay from the H-1/H-2 merge to Keehi interchange
• H-1 freeway shoulder improvements from Kapolei to the H-1/H-2 merge
• Selected "queue jumpers" to get express buses over long lines of traffic at congested traffic lights.
  

Honolulu Pavements ala Mufi

Hannemann just dropped his latest propaganda piece. In it he claims that while in office he:

- Filled more than 244,323 potholes
- Resurfaced 566 lane miles
- Spent $124 million on road rehabilitation

My take on these "accomplishments" is as follows:

(1) That's nearly a quarter million ways of patching pavements the wrong way and at a huge labor and material cost. And with a poor visual, safety and ride-quality result.

(2) This includes fixes on 2, 4 and 6 lanes roads. Using a 4-lane road as an average and three years in the office, yields a tiny resurfacing record of 47 road miles per year. The city will never catch up with its $1.8 billion pavement repair backlog. Worse yet, most of the lane miles claimed are likely to be long patches and superficial half inch jobs which begin to deteriorate immediately and last but a few years. (A properly rehabilitated or resurfaced road will last a minimum of 10 and up to 25 years.)

(3) Only in the 2009 budget Hannemann allocated $77 million on rehabilitation and that's too low. Having spent $124 M in three years shows that he does not have a clue when it comes to priorities. And given his traditional thuthiness with the facts, this item may also include the cost of doing the potholes and resurfacing!

How Would Elevated Rail Look in Honolulu?

I visited Miami which has a similar open air system, similar weather and similar type of fully elevated rail. Parenthetically I should mention that Miami with which we share several geographic, weather and cultural similarities has the county's worse level of ridership for its massive and expensive fully elevated rail.

Miami's stations are longer but lower than the ones proposed for Honolulu. Take a look at this YouTube pictorial tour:



Imagine this structure along Farrington Hwy. and in the middle of Kamehameha Highway. But that's the good news. Try to fit it in your mind along Salt Lake Blvd., Dillingham Blvd., Ala Moana Blvd. and Queen St. and Kona St.

Miami had the room to put this thing on the side of a very wide artery which today is seven lanes wide. Honolulu does not have this luxury. Many properties and will be lost permanently to add this urban blight directly overhead along vital arteries with its pylons permanently closing traffic lanes.

We are all concerned that tourism is down now. Let's see what the impact to tourism will be when 30+ miles of permanent blight of this type is installed on Oahu.

Repeating a Lie does not Make it the Truth

The Honorable Ann Kobayashi
Chair Committee on Executive Matters
Honolulu City Council
530 South King Street, Room 202
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813

Dear Councilmember Kobayashi:

Attached for your information are two lists of documented misinformation. The first list compiles misinformation from several websites such as fixoahu.blogspot.com and stoprailnow.com. The second list compiles misinformation from a Stop Rail Now ad that ran in the Honolulu Advertiser on Sunday, September 14, 2008. Together there are 33 items that serve as a sample of the many misinformation items that are being spread by anti-rail organizations.

We hope this information will be useful to you.
Wayne Y. Yoshioka
Director
==========================

My responses to Yioshioka's supposed misinformation that is attributable to my blog (fixoahu.blogspot.com) are listed below.

==========================

"Rail simply takes current conditions and makes them twice as bad in 2030."

The fixed guideway reduces future traffic congestion by 11 percent, according to the Alternatives Analysis. The statement in the blog is misleading. As Oahu grows in population and employment, traffic congestion will worsen. Fixed guideway transit does the best job of managing this congestion. Without it, traffic congestion would be worse.

Prevedouros response: Traffic congestion by rail could be reduced by 6% using 2006 traffic levels. In other words, if we suddenly had rail in 2006, it would reduce total travel times between the H1/H2 merge and Waikiki by a smallish 6%. Rail provides no relief if there is any more development in the Ewa plains. This is clearly shown in the Hoopili Permit Application for 12,000 new homes between Waipahu and Ewa Beach. Year 2030 traffic conditions with or without rail will be at level F. the worst possible. Rail is billions of tax dollars wasted for tiny current conditions relief, and no long term relief.

==========================

" ... the Hannemann administration has chosen to pursue, from the beginning, an elevated heavy rail system, which every analysis has shown to do little or nothing to reduce traffic congestion."

We have objectively pursued the best mass transit option to relieve future traffic congestion. The Alternatives Analysis examined the impact of four options on future traffic conditions - No Build, Transportation System Management Alternative (expanding bus service), Managed Lanes and a fixed guideway.

Prevedouros response: In November 2004, the search committee that was evaluating applicants for director of the City DTS for the new Hannemann administration had an explicit qualifying question: “Will you favor and support rail?” Rail did not exist as a recommendation in any DTS, Hawaii DOT or Oahu MPO documents. A politician made rail a priority. It’s that simple.

==========================

"Rail's immense construction costs and operating losses will preclude the use of funding for other transportation solutions."

The City, along with the State of Hawaii, is a partner in the Oahu Regional Transportation Plan 2030, which commits $3 billion to future transportation solutions, independent of the fixed guideway.

Prevedouros response: As soon as rail was proposed the Nimitz Flyover project which had a completed and signed EIS was mothballed. It is a project capable of providing substantial congestion relief, particularly if it is couples with a couple of underpasses in downtown.

Nothing of substance to relieve traffic ever gets done while a multibillion dollar boondoggle is on the horizon. The said $3B is expenditures over decades and do not provide any sizable capacity addition or congestion relief.

==========================

"A conservative estimate is that the proposed rail will require ... a 40% increase in property taxes in order to be built .... "

This is a scare tactic. The subsidy for rail could be funded without any increase in taxes, property or otherwise.

Prevedouros response: The 40% increase in property taxes is too low. In case Yioshioka has been asleep for the last four months, the national and local economies are in serious trouble. There simply is no money to complete projects in construction, let alone start new ones. This is particularly true for rail projects because FTA funding is tiny.

FTA does not have any approved monies for the Honolulu project beyond current studies and paperwork. It cannot legally do that before a completed EIS. As of October 7, 2008, there is not even a draft EIS available.


The soonest that any FTA support may materialize is 2011. And all of it will be used to buy rails, rail yards, trains, maintenance equipement, electromechanical systems for 20 stations, and more than 20 emergency generators. All procured in the mainland and foreign countries. Not a penny of federal dollars will ever reach Hawaii shores. On the contrary, Hawaii taxes will be sent overseas.

==========================

"The city, therefore, after taking out the 10%, is receiving approximately $140 million annually, for a total of $2.1 billion over the life of the increase. That is just over a third of the cost of the $6.4 billion rail project without the federal money, and just under two-thirds of the cost if Honolulu receives all of the funds it would be asking for."

This is incorrect. The revenue projections in the Alternatives Analysis call for approximately $2.6 billion in GET revenues in 2006 funds. These projections [are] conservative and lower than those used by the state Council on Revenues and based on 15-year trends.

Prevedouros response: The city administration is in its own railigious world. It has simply lost sight of the fiscal reality of the country, the recession in Hawaii, and the federal government's funding ability.

==========================

"The City has never said how much it will cost to operate and maintain the rail."

Estimated annual operating and maintenances costs for a 20-mile fixed guideway are $60 million in 2006 dollars. This has been mentioned in Council meetings and in community meetings.

Prevedouros response: Really? Which route, which vendor and at what price of fuel to produce electricity? How much was gas in summer 2006?

On the one hand City says that motorists cannot afford high gas prices, on the other hand they keep their maintenance costs at mid-2006 figures. My estimate is that the rail's annual maintenance cost including transit authority, stations, rail yard and all person-hours related to the rail will be well north of $150 million in today's values.

==========================

"HOT lanes pay for themselves with toll revenues and federal funds."

Toll revenues would fund only about 20 to 25 percent of the cost of HOT lanes. No other funding sources have been identified.

Prevedouros response: Why not seek funding from the FHWA, the Federal Highway Administration? Its funding pot has been many times larger than the one of the Federal Transit Administration.

FHWA paid for 80% of the design and construction cost of the H1, H-2, H-3 freeways and for the Kalanianaole widening. But of course you have to apply…

In July 2008 U.S. DOT sectetary Peters provided 15 billion dollars of funding for Private Activity Bonds exclusively for the development of HOT lanes. In contrast, the annual FTA funding for New Starts (where Honolulu will be applying for funding) is under $2 billion.

HOT lanes is the nation's number one solution for solving traffic congestion. Washington D.C. is adding 14 miles of 2-lane, 2-way HOT lanes along the Capital Beltway.

==========================

"The bottom line is that 10 to 12 miles of a high occupancy highway (HOT lanes with express buses) has incomparably lower operational costs than a rail system with 20 to 30 stations."

Estimated operating and maintenance costs are about the same for Managed Lanes, and the accompanying sizable expansion of TheBus fleet, and the fixed guideway with a far smaller fleet expansion. Because of reduced traffic congestion with rail transit, not as many buses will be required.

Prevedouros response: No way! FHWA and APTA sources show that the total cost for a 10 mile trip is 40 cents on a highway and 400 cents on a mass transit system. With HOT lanes, TheBus can maintain the same fleet and provide a much better service. This is because, express buses will not be doing 15 mph on the congested H-1 freeway but 60 mph on the HOT lanes, so the same bus can do two trips in one hour. No additional buses are needed.

==========================

"The Hannemann rail is being designed so that its maximum capacity is fixed from day 1 to decades in the future."

The fixed guideway is scalable - more transit vehicles can be added if ridership increases.

Prevedouros response: The proposed rail is minimally scalable. It will start with a capacity of 6,000 and it will top out at 9,000 which pales in comparison to the 25,000 people per hour that the H-1 fwy. carries today in the peak direction, in one hour. All of those 25,000 people are comfortably seated, but over 4,000 of the (theoretical) 6,000 rail passengers will be standees.

==========================

"Rail has the capacity of about one HOT lane."

Rail can transport approximately 6,000 residents per hour; Managed Lanes-HOT lanes can transport approximately 2,200 residents per hour, according to the Alternatives Analysis. P

revedouros response: The AA was a joke in nearly all respects. It added two HOT lanes and it removed the zipper lane for a net benefit of a single 10-mile express lane.

Three HOT lanes will minimally carry 12,000 people, but most likely they can carry well over 15,000 with a large number of buses and vanpools. HOT lanes are the nation’s number one priority in decongesting urban areas. DTS has not gotten that memo yet.

==========================

"Like The Boat, rail will not provide time competitive service."

For commuters from the West side and Central Oahu, future travel times with a rail system will be less than today. Examples include those traveling from Waianae, Kapolei, Ewa, Waipahu or Mililani to downtown. (Alternatives Analysis, table 3-6). For TheBoat, travel time at peak hour is approximately one hour from Kalalaeloa to Aloha Tower, which is competitive with a rush hour commute by private vehicle.

Prevedouros response: Door-to-door service by TheBoat is over 50% longer than by car and this will be also true for rail. One needs to remember that for 20 out of 24 hours in a day, rail will be slower than car for ALL trips. Rail may have a small advantage for a small portion of the population with long commutes during two to three hours on weekdays, but that’s about all that its good for. Too little for the price tag and that’s another reason why it should be a rejected.

==========================

"Bottom line: the EIS must include regional bus rapid transit (bus only based alternative with many express buses) and a mixed use transitway (Managed lanes/HOT lanes alternative with many express buses) in its detailed environmental assessment."

The EIS will encompass proposed routes for the fixed guideway system, and their impacts on social, environmental, archeological and cultural factors, among many. Earlier in this process, during the Alternatives Analysis and scoping phase, a number of possible long-term traffic solutions were explored at length. These include: managed lanes, expanded bus service, ferry service, a tunnel connecting Pearl Harbor with Honolulu, a monorail, and a fixed guideway.

Prevedouros response: Bottom line, the City asked PB to do a steel-on-steel only EIS and therefore it will have its hands full with lawsuits and violations from the Council on Environmental Quality.

==========================
"The rail project is totally out of line for the size of our community."

Honolulu is fifth densest among cities with populations of 500,000 or more. We are the only one without a rail system.

Prevedouros response: This is not attributable to by blog, but I would like to take a stab at it. Density is one indicator, but if you don't have the population to pay for it then you should not build it. It is like saying that large people drive very expensive cars. Not true! Rich large people drive very expensive large cars. Honolulu is neither large, not rich. Keep the rails off Oahu.

Replace TheBoat by TheFerry

During my mayoral run I visited the Barbers Point dock of TheBoat but since the service is so slow, I did not have the time to leave my car there in order to personally test it and time it. However, both the Star Bulletin and Grassroot Institute have done so and the latter also analyzed TheBoat's costs.

During the mayoral debate I confronted the incumbent mayor with TheBoat as a fine sample of irresponsible public administration. His answer was a spin that alternatives are needed. In his book, alternatives that cost five times more than TheBus or TheCar and take twice as long for door-to-door service are worthy of a $40 to $60 subsidy per trip. Indeed it is sad that people with disregard for responsibility and accountability are elected.

If you wish to read a recent short but comprehensive appraisal of TheBoat go here: http://www.grassrootinstitute.org/Publications/BoatToNowhere_0908.pdf

The effect of the TheBoat is to remove up to two buses per hour from the H-1 freeway which carries over 11,000 vehicles per hour in the peaks. And for that we pay $5 million per year!

But on a positive note, a Kailua couple has posted elsewhere, that TheBoat is the world's best ocean cruise: Only two bucks for an one hour long ocean cruise with decent food aboard, tons of empty seats to choose from and free wi-fi. Those who take it are hopefully grateful to the rest of us for subsidizing over 95% of the cost of their ocean cruise.

If one wishes to use the ocean as a cost-effective medium to reduce traffic congestion, then I point you to our University of Hawaii Congestion Study: http://www.eng.hawaii.edu/~panos/UHCS_ES5.pdf

The Pearl Harbor Car Ferry system is defined as a service with two or three large barges with four outboard engines and a crew of three people that transport cars and buses with their passengers staying inside them across the mouth of Pearl Harbor. The trip would take about 5 to 6 minutes but the short-cut in trip length is major. This system is tailored to Kapolei, Ewa and Ewa Beach areas and is designed with a 500 vehicle per hour capacity.

If such a ferry service is provided for $2 per car per trip, then the travel time from Ewa to downtown can be reduced from 65 minutes to about 37 minutes, or by 44%.

The ferry option provides a substantial relief for 500 vehicles per hour or nearly 1,000 people per hour. It is therefore highly advisable that the ineffective, unreliable and expensive TheBoat is replaced by TheFerry which can be operated daily between 5:30 to 8:30 AM, and 3:30 to 6:30 PM by a private licensed water taxi or similar contractor.

Federal support for rail is tiny -- Rail study cost for Oahu rail is exorbitant

Mufi Hannemman recently “lauded” the federal government’s “support for rail” because of a release of a little less than 30 million dollars in federal matching funds to support 15 rail projects, mostly in the form of rail-related studies and small system upgrades.

Of course 30 million dollars is only enough to build a couple mid-rise dormitories at the UH. But what is most startling here is the cost of studies (paperwork) for Environmental Impact Studies elsewhere. Just a few million dollars as one can see in the list of projects below from the Associated Press, dated September 30, 2008.

In contrast Honolulu spent 10 million dollars for the Alternatives Analysis alone in 2006!

Is it not ridiculous that Honolulu will be expending at least 107 million dollars for rail studies, propaganda and paperwork? (This is for the Mufi rail proposal only, not for all past failed attempts to install 19th century technology on Oahu.) Note that over two thirds of of $107 million comes from collections from the general excise tax.

----------------

Passenger rail projects receiving federal matching grants:

ARIZONA: Environmental impact study for rail service between Phoenix and Tucson, $1 million.

CALIFORNIA: Convert 4.5 miles of side track to a second main line on the San Joaquin Corridor, $5 million.

ILLINOIS: Install centralized traffic control and cab signals from Joliet to Mazonia, $1.55 million. Also, install cab signal technology from Mazonia to Ridgeley, $1.85 million.

NEW YORK: Albany Station track and signal improvements, $1.25 million.

OHIO: Feasibility study for startup service of two round trips per day between Cleveland and Columbus, and possibly to Cincinnati, $62,500.

VERMONT: Replace one mile of rail and redeck four bridges on route of state-supported Vermonter, $450,000. Also, rebuild two miles of track on route of state-supported Ethan Allen Express, $581,775.

MAINE: Portland area track improvements, $500,000.

MINNESOTA: Environmental impact study for new service from Minneapolis to Duluth, $1.1 million.

MISSOURI: Construction of one 9,000-foot passing track near California, Mo., and engineering for a second in Knob Noster to be used by the state-supported Mules and Anne Rutledge services, $3.3 million.

VIRGINIA: Construction of third track for passing in Spotsylvania County, $2 million.

WASHINGTON: Engineering, environmental review and right of way acquisition for 1.2-mile segment of Point Defiance Bypass project from Tacoma to Nisqually, $6 million.

WISCONSIN: Install 17.85 miles of continuously welded rail between Milwaukee and the Illinois-Wisconsin state line, replacing the last section of remaining jointed rail on the Milwaukee-Chicago corridor, $5 million. Also, planning for the Midwest Regional Rail Initiative, $297,000.

Source: U.S. Department of Transportation.

Honolulu Economic Development Plan: An Integrated Vision of Infrastructure, Tourism, Energy, and Sustainability

Our four point plan to secure a bright economic future for Honolulu may be summarized as follows:

1. Bring our infrastructure to world-class standards. A city in the current state of disrepair like ours simply cannot have a serious discussion about economic growth until our sewage is properly contained and treated, out water is clean and stays in the pipes, our roads provide a reasonably speedy service and are free of bumps and potholes, our trash is recycled, re-used and controlled; and our taxes are reduced so that business stay in business and low income folks are not forced into homelessness.

2. Develop sustainable energy supplies to secure a low-cost expansion that is largely free of fossil fuels. Hawaii is blessed with abundant solar, wind, geothermal, and wave energy that can free us from the shackles of imported oil and coal. We had a tradition of sugarcane agriculture; sugarcane is the preferred source for making ethanol. Where is the wisdom in importing ethanol from Iowa?

3. Reposition our tourism to serve established and emerging niche markets. For example, specialize in hosting professional and specialty conferences that bring in millions of high-value visitors from around the world. Many conferences can showcase Honolulu as the city of the future, a city that is ethnically integrated like no other, a city that is clean and in good repair, a city that is cooled and powered with green energy. We can lead the world in true eco-tourism by demonstrating what real sustainability looks like.

4. Reverse the brain drain through the knowledge gained by giving this city the infrastructure and energy alternatives it deserves. Our university graduates will study, work in, and export sustainable technology to cities around the world, cities that will come to Honolulu to model what we have created in:

Renewable energy, trash and recycling factories, point to point fuel cell buses on high occupancy reversible expressways, intelligent transportation systems, green buildings, telecommuting and the integration of culture and the arts into technology and infrastructure.

Indeed trash factories and reversible lanes can be designed with beauty and cultural sensitivity in mind. See for example what the Figg Bridge company has done in Indian reservations and national parks.

We have solutions which combine form, function, efficiency, results, and state of the art technology. It’s worth staying home and making this beautiful place truly great.

Homelessness on Oahu

Earlier today, I testified before the Hawaii Housing Authority on the issue of homelessness in our city. The following is an expanded version of what I stated at that meeting.

As an 18+ year resident on Oahu and a candidate for mayor, I am alarmed by the homelessness issue and its impact on our people, our tourists, our parks and our beaches.

The Kapiolani "tent park" is only the beginning. A shrinking economy, reduced tourism and large anticipated cuts in both public and private budgets have the potential to make this an explosive issue which will stress service providers at all levels.

There are many causes to homelessness, including cost of living, low pay, unemployment, housing affordability, mental health, drugs, and, for a few, a life style choice of permanent camping.

There are several services and solutions, including priority housing for single parents, cubicles, camps or areas with facilities for sleeping in a car, other temporary accommodations, physical and mental health treatment, affordable housing and other public housing.

There are many agencies involved and service providers such as:

• Hawaii Housing Authority
• Partners in Care
• HUD such as Community Development Block Grant
• other Federal assistance
• City Council and Mayor
• State Department of Health
• Police Department
• Aloha United Way and Foodbank Hawaii
• Churches and several other advocates

Therefore, a County Unit on Homelessness is necessary to coordinate and consolidate all these activities and offerings.

Homelessness is a multi-issue, multi-solution and multi-fragmented challenge. Some of the issues and positive directions include the following:

• City cooperation with state is lacking; and city is going out of the affordable housing service at the worse possible time.
• The city has not cooperated by providing warning of evictions thus putting responding agencies and volunteers in sudden crises.
• Last year a bill proposed a 20 million allocation for a downtown homeless center but city administration never showed up to support it.
• Public private partnerships for affordable housing development and management work. We should do more of them and apply proper controls.
• The state should take a serious look on sustainable lease. It will likely work well for low income families. (A sustainable lease is a leasehold arrangement that maintains property in an affordable price range.)
• There are complaints that several people residing in public housing own new vehicles that are worth well over $40,000 dollars. Why are their owners in subsidized public housing ?
• There are concerns that the development of public housing and free sleeping quarters sometimes act as incentives for local and in-migrating homelessness. So you are balancing on a tight rope.

A major crisis is looming with the downturn in economy, the closure of homeless centers such as the recent one in Waihiawa, and the Next Step 151-cubicle unit provided by the state will close this year. Although it may sound counterintuitive at first, it is essential to increase the budget and coordinate the response to the homeless issue so that it remains at a manageable level.

To this end, for the interim, the city, in cooperation with the state should:

• identify vacant lots and specific areas in some public parks and
• develop a homeless camping permit much like the regular camping permit.

The advantages of a homeless permit are that:

• It designates specific places and periods.
• Assisting agencies will know where each individual is located.
• If the police are called, the homeless campers can show their permit.
• Maintenance on parks will be easier due to a manageable number of people at each site.
• The permit will have an expiration date which can be renewed.

This permit process would be a proactive approach to homelessness making it measurable, tractable and manageable.

PM Zipper Lane: One More Step Towards Traffic Relief

For many years now, I have been working with traffic analysis and making recommendations in order to reduce the acute traffic congestion that plagues our city every morning and afternoon. Some of these have already been completed, while others, like the Middle Street merge fix, are still in limbo. I was pleased with today's Honolulu Advertiser front page article, where I see that another one of my recommendations is going forward: The implementation of a PM Zipper lane.

Some other recommendations:

• Fix the existing H-1 bottlenecks, such as the ones listed in this Honolulu Star Bulletin article.
• Implementing contraflow lanes along Dillingham Boulevard.
• Improving traffic signal timing and coordination, as mentioned in a previous post.
• Implementing or encouraging flextime or 4x10 work weeks - something which the State is now beginning to explore.
• Have the UH begin classes later, so that the earliest classes do not coincide with the peak of rush hour.

Implement the Waiau widening project, adding a lane from the H-2 to the Waikele/Waipahu off-ramp.

And in the longer term:

• Build one-lane-per-direction underpasses at existing maxed-out intersections that cannot be widenend.
• Build the reversible HOT lanes from the H-1/H-2 merge to Iwilei.

High Occupancy and Toll (HOT) Lanes Benefit Everyone

Congestion pricing often draws the criticism that it disproportionately burdens lower-income drivers. But a new report by California researchers contends that these "pay-as-you-go" transportation options might actually be more fair to all income levels than paying for highway or transit improvements through sales taxes.

The study examines the High Occupancy/Toll lanes on California 91 in Orange County. The 91 Express Lanes – two lanes in each direction in the center of the highway – cover a 10-mile stretch of frequently congested freeway. Users must have an electronic toll tag in their vehicle and pay a varying price depending on how much traffic is clogging the main lanes. Tolls are set to keep traffic in the express lanes free-flowing and range from $1.25 to $10 in a metropolitan area of over 15 million people. In Denver of about six million people, the HOT lanes charge ranges between 50 cents and $3.25.

The study compared how tolls and sales taxes affect Orange County's lower-income residents. It found that political opposition to congestion pricing on equity grounds is flawed.

The 91 Express Lanes are used by middle- and upper-middle-income households. Researchers then examined how people of different income levels would be affected had the four lanes been funded by a sales tax increase instead of congestion tolls. Orange County already has a local-option transportation sales tax that generates about $240 million annually.

Had the sales tax been increased to pay for the extra lanes (like Hawaii’s 0.5% tack onto the standard 4% general excise tax for the Hannemann rail proposal) the poorest county residents would have paid more than $3 million more in taxes than they actually did under the current tolling system. Unlike a sales tax, paying to use the HOT lanes is voluntary.

"Using sales taxes to fund roadways creates substantial savings to drivers by shifting some of the costs of driving from drivers to consumers at large, and in the process disproportionately favors the more affluent at the expense of the impoverished," according to report authors Professor Brian Taylor, director of the UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies, and Lisa Schweitzer, assistant professor at USC's School of Policy, Planning, and Development. (Dr. Taylor spent a year long sabbatical at the UH-Manoa department of civil engineering in 2007.)

U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters, a proponent of charging drivers for the use of infrastructure, said the study provides more proof that tolls do not unfairly burden lower- and middle-class drivers.

"Congestion pricing and tolling have the power to reduce commute times and make our metropolitan transportation networks far more efficient and environmentally friendly," Peters wrote on her blog "Fast Lane."

The proposed cost of using some HOT lanes is raising eyebrows, however, and is certain to continue the debate over the best methods for financing transportation improvements.

The private builders of new HOT lanes on the Capital Beltway in Virginia are betting enough drivers in the Washington region will be willing to pay tolls. Construction began last month on 14 miles of Interstate 495 HOT lanes between Springfield and the Dulles Toll Road. Transurban, the Australian company that will operate the lanes when they open in 2013, does not expect drivers to use the lanes every day but only when the value of time and certainty outweighs the price of access.

Traffic Signal Synchronization

Many of the traffic lights on our roadways seem to be almost random. Sometimes they allow us to travel for several blocks before encountering a red light, but much more often they stop us at almost every intersection. The worst case is when a traffic light turns red shortly before a big platoon of cars nears its stop line. This should not be the case! To a traffic engineer, these occurrences are a red flag and demand a solution. Not only because random red lights are artificial bottlenecks, but also because they encourage red-light-running and other unsafe motorist behaviors which, in turn, may lead to crashes.

The easiest and most cost-effective way to deal with this issue is to synchronize the traffic lights, allowing cars to travel at least five blocks along main arteries without having to stop. As reported by the federal Department of Transportation, synchronization of traffic signals can and does yield tremendous benefits. A couple of examples, cited in the link above include: Texas, with a benefit-cost ratio of 62:1 (i.e.: for ever dollar spent, $62 was saved) and California, with a benefit-cost ratio of 19:1.

In summer 2008, the Institute of Transportation Engineers reported that Baltimore, Maryland spent about $750,000 to optimize and synchronize 800 traffic lights. Actual travel time runs were made with the old and the new traffic light timings. The improvements were huge and the cost-benefit ratio was 43 to 1.

An example of what synchronization would look like using King, University and Beretania streets in Honolulu is shown below.



The scenario above is similar to what exists today. The traffic signals are all uncoordinated, and, while some cars are able to make it through one or two intersections before being stopped again, the entire system operates almost randomly.

If the signals are properly timed, however...


As you can see, traffic travels from one end of the area to the other, almost without no stops, and much more smoothly than in the unsynchronized case.

The table below shows that the result of synchronization is a significant reduction in lost time, a significant reduction is the number of times vehicles had to stop. In turn, this results in a drop in the amount of emissions and fuel use.



Throughout urban Honolulu, with its over 500 traffic lights, the proper timing of intersection traffic lights can save over 50 gallons of fuel for the average car over a year. And ten times as much for taxis, buses and delivery trucks that are in traffic all the time. Fuel cost, fuel efficiency, congestion reduction and reduction of long idling times at traffic lights are critical elements in the operation of fleets. One of the largest fleets on Oahu is the TheBus with over 550 vehicles.

Carbonization of Waste is a UH-based Trash Management Option

Technology developed by University of Hawaii researcher Michael J. Antal Jr. to produce charcoal from green waste can reduce the burden on the Waimanalo Gulch landfill.

Dr. Antal's flash carbonization process uses heat and pressure to turn scrap tires, corn cobs, macadamia nut shells and green waste into a high-quality, clean alternative to wood or coal.

Flash Carbonization™ of raw sewage sludge produced in Honolulu's Ewa treatment plant was converted into charcoal. Charcoal yields of about 30% (dry basis) were produced from the sewage sludge.

Charcoal is the sustainable fuel replacement for coal. Coal combustion is the most important contributor to climate change. On the other hand, the combustion of charcoal - sustainably produced from renewable biomass - adds no CO2 to the atmosphere! Thus, the replacement of coal by charcoal is among the most important steps we can take to ameliorate climate change.

Combustion of charcoal does not add to the CO2 burden of the atmosphere because charcoal is produced from renewable biomass that would otherwise decompose (i.e. rot) in a landfill or in the ground and become CO2. Thus the combustion of charcoal is a small part of nature's carbon cycle upon which life depends.

We burn coal to generate a good portion of the electrical power in Hawaii. Oahu has a 180 MW coal fired power plant. The highest priority for knowledgeable people who care about the environment is the replacement of coal by cleaner, renewable fuels.

The Sand Island sewage treatment plant converts its sewage sludge to dry pellets which can be used to enrich the soil. However, the other sewage plants continue to send their sludge to the landfill. Installing a carbon diversion system at all the other plants could not only reduce the burden on our landfill but cut down on the import and use of coal to generate electricity.

The replacement of coal by charcoal has other benefits. Coal is laden with mercury and sulfur. Mercury is a deadly toxin. Coal is also laden with sulfur and the combustion of coal leads to the release of sulfur oxides into the atmosphere. Sulfur oxides are a principal cause of acid rain. In contrast, charcoal contains no mercury and virtually no sulfur. In fact, our drug stores sell charcoal tablets to eat as an aid for digestion! Moreover, on a pound per pound basis, charcoal contains much more energy than most coals.

Just this year, in July and August, thousands of discarded old tires were found in Kapolei. At least two recycling companies apparently have had problems with old tires. They can serve as feedstock for a carbon diversion system and produce tons of charcoal in the process. My personal preference, however, is to use old, used and discarded tires in the asphalt pavement mix, which offers a cheaper re-use path and an improved final product, i.e., more durable asphalt pavements.

Oahu has thousands of acres devoted to growing seed corn for the mainland. The system can process corn cobs into miniature charcoal corn cobs which could probably be sold at a premium. It takes only a half acre to install a carbon diversion system which can process up to four tons of waste material per hour.

For more information see: http://www.carbondiversion.com

Can we get 80% federal funding for HOT lanes?

The Federal Highway Administration provides 80% of the funds for all highways designed as a part of the NHS, the National Highway System. The feds paid 80% of the H-1, H-2 and H-3 freeways. I am 99% sure that the feds also paid 80% of the Kalanianaole widening from 4 to 6 lanes from Aina Haina to Hawaii Kai. The Pali and Likelike highways are also part of the NHS.

The new reversible HOT lanes can indeed be part of the NHS and play a significant role as an emergency backbone in a disaster. They can receive the standard 80% FHWA funding, if approved by the FHWA. Both the transit and highways branches approve projects on a competitive basis and there are more projects than funds, but with a rolling horizon of 10 to 20 years, most projects get funding.

Why did Tampa do its reversible express lanes (REL) alone with state and county funds? Because this enabled them to finish the project in under 7 years from concept to open-for-traffic. It would have taken over 11 years if the Tampa-Hillsborough County Expressway Authority that developed the REL had decided to seek federal funding. The federal oversight and bureaucracy adds several years to project delivery, for both road and transit projects.

In July 2008, US DOT secretary Peters released 15 billion dollars in guarantees for private financiers to develop public-private partnerships (PPP) for the explicit purpose of building HOT lanes to decongest the main cities of the nation. The first project to successfully apply and receive funding from this extra source was the Capital Beltway in Washington DC, where the Virginia DOT is building 14 miles of HOT lanes, 2 lanes per direction.

Smart Growth Does not Reduce Greenhouse Gases

For today's post I would like to quote the nationally renowned transportation policy expert, and multiple time presidential adviser, Robert Poole of the Reason Foundation:

The premise [that smart growth reduces green house gases] goes something like this. Transportation is a major source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and personal vehicles are a significant fraction of transportation. The more people drive, the more GHGs their vehicles emit. If their job, school, shopping, etc. are close to where they live, they won’t drive as much (since they could walk or use transit). Therefore, government should force all new development to be high-density and transit-friendly, as a powerful tool for GHG reduction.

By the time you get to the end of this “logic” chain, you are actually looking at minuscule reductions in GHGs, as many different analyses have pointed out.

First, while transportation represents about 28% of GHG emissions in the United States today (according to the EPA), passenger cars are only 34% of that, or 9.5% of the total.

Second, over the next several decades, GHG emissions per mile driven will likely drop significantly, thanks to federal and state (e.g., California) measures to require increased fuel economy and encourage alternative propulsion sources (such as plug-in hybrids).

Third, densifying development applies almost entirely to new development, leaving the vast majority of the already built environment unchanged.

Fourth, just because transit is nearby does not mean it takes you where you need to go. Since most commuting is suburb-to-suburb while transit works best on radial routes to a central business district, it’s unlikely to capture much additional commute mode share. And since most people don'’t want to walk to a corner store and pay high prices, they will still drive their cars to Target or Costco to load up on good values.

Parsons Brinckerhoff Get's It Right, Worldwide, except for Honolulu

You've got to love it when one of the nation's largest engineering firms, Parsons Brinckerhoff , with a tradition in rail systems (and in large project cost overruns as of late) actually disseminates the right mass transit propaganda worldwide.

For the last 20 years Parsons Brinckerhoff have done all rail studies in Honolulu. This time around Parsons Brinckerhoff helps Hannemann misrepresent the system by calling it "Light Rail" when in reality they are designing a fully elevated Heavy Rail system. Another correct term for it is Rapid Transit. Light Rail is a modern tramway that operates at grade or on street lanes. None of this is true for the Hannemann rail.

To their credit, Parsons Brinckerhoff did propose a bus rapid transit (BRT) system for Honolulu during the Harris administration and the Regional BRT would have made a lot of good for Leeward Oahu commutes. Alas, once again politicians overrode engineers, and instead of the regional BRT, they put the cart in front of the horse and started with a disastrous In-town BRT deployment with narrow lanes on Kuhio Avenue, and permanent lane takings from Kapiolani and Ala Moana Boulevards.

HonoluluTraffic.com and I were much in favor of the Regional BRT but opposed to the Harris' version of the In-town BRT, and thankfully, that traffic nightmare was permanently defeated when the Federal Transit Administration revoked its Record on Decision and all possible funding for the project.

The reader should note that Cheryl Soon, director of the city's Department of Transportation Services during the Harris administration said the following in 2000 based on Parsons Brinckerhoff study recommendations on the same corridor that Hannemann proposes rail today:

The light rail transit alternative was dropped because subsequent analyses revealed that Bus Rapid Transit could accomplish virtually all of the objectives of light rail transit at substantially less cost.

And now a quote from Parsons Brinckerhoff literature: Bus Rapid Transit—The Next Generation of Public Transportation

Around the world, transit owners are turning to bus rapid transit (BRT) toprovide communities with efficient, flexible, affordable transportation.

From Boston to Beijing to Brisbane, Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) is supporting transit providers with a full range of planning, design and construction management services.

Whether in congested urban areas or suburban travel corridors, BRT is attracting new riders by combining the high-performance characteristics of rail with the flexibility and economy of buses. Transit providers are discovering that BRT achieves the excellent quality of service that customers associate with rail—but at significantly reduced cost.

On BRT projects worldwide, system owners have chosen PB to help tailor BRT technology to local needs. To the riding public, BRT looks, feels and performs like rapid transit.

Service is frequent, speedy and comfortable. To the owner, BRT is an innovative alternative that can be built faster and with less expense than comparable rail systems.

Source: http://www.pbworld.com/news_events/publications/brochures/pdf/BRT.pdf

A Good Way to Spend Five Billion in Honolulu

Someone asked me this: If you save Oahu the five plus billion dollars that rail would cost in local taxes, how would you spend it? Here is my response.

Five Billion Dollars is a mighty sum and lots of good things can be done with it. Recall that five billion is 5,000 million. Also recall that Charlotte, North Carolina built its light rail with 450 million dollars. Less than $100 million of the rail system's cost burdened the city’s taxpayers; the rest was contibuted from state and federal resources.

Honolulu plans to do the same for a cost of over 6,400 million dollars for 30 miles of rail, with five billion dollars of tax burden for Oahu’s 400,000 taxpayers. The city recently announced at a City Council session that there will be budget shortfalls for both construction and maintenance. They said that budget shortfalls will be covered by increased property taxes.

I estimate that property taxes need to increase by at least 40% to cover construction and operation shortfalls as soon as the GET 4.5% sunsets to 4.0% in 2022.

I do not plan to increase any taxes in four years. My budget plan for investing five billion dollars of local taxes on local infrastructure is as follows:

1. Assuming that the already expended $0.5 billion has been spent on good and necessary work, then $1.0 billion to bring our sewers to a B+ state.
2. About $1 billion for two trash factories that will allow us to close Waimanalo Gulch landfill and generate valuable recyclables with only 2% if trash being actual waste. We can actually afford to ship this little residual waste to mainland landfills. This billion also includes monies to convert the WG landfill into a methane and photovoltaic energy producing unit.
3. About $1.5 billion to bring city pavements to a C+ condition. Right now we are at a solid F, since Honolulu ranks 3rd bottom out of 67 cities with a population of 500,000 or more in road quality.
4. About $0.5 billion for traffic operations quick (but effective) fixes such as traffic light synchrolization, underpasses, spot lane additions and other localized bottleneck fixes.
5. About $0.5 billion on general community welfare including fixes to parks, beaches, athletic complexes, libraries, pools, and playgrounds.
6. And $0.5 billion matched by a federal and private partnership to form a $1.0 billion financing block to build 10-12 miles of reversible high occupancy express lanes from the H-1 and H-2 freeway merge to Airport, Kalihi and Iwilei which will solve the supermajority of the congestion issues on the Leeward corridor.
   

For more details and interesting movies and posts about my ideas and 21st century solutions, please visit my main campaign site at panosforprogress.com and its HQ (digital headquarters) section.

International Road Federation Award

I am very happy to be associated with the developers and operators of one of the best expressways on the planet. Attica Tollway is longer than H-1, H-2 and H-3 freeways combined. It was built between 1998 and mid-2004 in Athens, Greece as part of the infrastructure for the 2004 Olympic Games.

In 2006 the 6-lane wide Attica Tollway won the award as the safest expressway. And now it won the award as the most environment friendly expressway by the International Road Federation!

==========================================================

Dear Panos,

Thank you very much for your outstanding help with the application of Attica Tollway to the International Road Federation. As you can see from the attached, IRF has awarded to our Organization the Global Road Achievement Award on Environmental Mitigation.

This is a great honor for us and on behalf of our Board of Directors and the 1200 people of Attica Tollway I want to thank you very much for your help and support. Much of this credit belongs to you and we appreciate very much the good effort.

All the best and much more,

Sincerely yours,

Bill Halkias

--------------------------------------------
Bill M. Halkias, PE
Chief Executive Officer
Attica Tollway Operations Authority
Attikes Diadromes SA
41.9 Km of Attiki Odos
Peania 19 002 - Greece
tel: + 30.210.6682000
fax: + 30.210.6635578
e-mail : bhalkias@attikesdiadromes.gr

==========================================================

The text of the award letter can be seen below.

(Click thumbnail for full document)

City Propaganda on Rail -- Hanneman's Fake Facts 7 to 10 out of 10

Myth 7: Operating costs for rail are lower than for managed lanes.

Fact: Even if trains are automated, rail requires many more people than managed or HOT lanes behind the scenes: security, transit police, inspectors, custodial staff, and a huge array of maintenance workers for rail cars, propulsion and brake systems, escalators, elevators, systems computers, ticket machines, lighting systems and the rail yard.

The maintenance of the managed lanes roadbed is minuscule compared to the wear and tear of the thousands of mechanical and electronic components of the rail. All rail technology is foreign to Hawaii and expensive specialized labor will be necessary.

Managed lanes will not require more drivers of new express bus routes because the same express buses will be able to offer two instead of one trip per hour given that in the congested direction, the bus will be traveling at 55 instead of 25 miles per hour.

The bottom line is that 10 to 12 miles of a high occupancy highway (HOT lanes with express buses) has incomparably lower operational costs than a rail system with 20 to 30 stations.

Myth 8: There is no more space for buses on the road.

Fact: Only a few streets, such as Hotel Street and Kapiolani Boulevard have conditions that may come close to being the “river of buses” for a few minutes like Hanneman's pro-rail ads claim to be warning against. These ads actually are proof of mismanagement rather than a built-in problem with bus operations in general. For even more evidence against this myth, please see this short video.

The vast majority of streets only see a single bus every five or so minutes during the peak times, and in cases were the current number of buses are insufficient to handle the peak load, the number of buses on a route can be increased or the standard buses could be replaced by articulated buses.

My proposed HOT lanes alternative to rail would also strongly support increased bus ridership, as express buses would be able to travel from the H-1/H-2 merge to downtown Honolulu at free-flow (55mph) speeds, as well as serving the door-to-door needs that only buses are capable of. For example, there will be direct express buses from Makakilo, Kapolei, Ewa, Waipahu, Waikele and Mililani to downtown, Ala Moana, Waikiki and the UH every 10 to 20 minutes depending on the level of demand.

This makes another advantage of buses obvious: Buses can be added or reduced depending on how demand (passenger loads) change over time. Buses can do that. In 1990 Kapolei to town demand was zero, now it is X, in 2020 may be 3X. We can simply add three times as many buses, but rail is fixed and not scalable. There will be no third track for express or additional trains. In the way the Hanneman rail is being designed, its maximum capacity is fixed from day 1 to decades into the future.

Myth 9: HOT lanes would only create more traffic by putting more cars on the road.

Fact: Unless there are people who go driving for fun during rush hour, all the HOT lanes will do is take the same people to their same destination, where they would park in the same parking stall, but in a fraction of the time that it takes for the same trip now. In order for there to be more cars on the road, there would need to be more jobs created in downtown Honolulu and more people commuting to those jobs. There is no plan to add jobs to downtown Honolulu.

Myth 10: There is no more space to park in downtown Honolulu.

Fact: First, as seen in the response to Myth 9, the high occupancy highway does not require additional parking downtown unless the number of jobs there also increases. However, there are lots both in and around downtown right now that have hundreds of empty stalls. Some of these lots could even be developed into larger parking structures to provide more parking and mixed use development, if needed.

Furthermore, a couple of these lots may be developed underground and a mini-tunnel can connect them to the end of the HOT lanes, so several hundred vehicles will go to park there directly and in fact "disappear" from the surface streets of Honolulu.

The picture below shows large parking lots east of Punchbowl Street. As of this writing in August 2008, one of the parking lots shown is used by a Honda dealer to store several hundred cars.

City Propaganda on Rail -- Hanneman's Fake Facts 4 to 6 out of 10

Myth 4: Rail is green.

Unlike cars or buses which become more efficient and green every year, a rail system would use the same increasingly inefficient technology (oil or coal to electricity) for the next 30 years. Cars like the 2009 Toyota Prius are beginning to move even further ahead, with solar panels being installed to recharge the car’s battery when not in use. Honda is offering a fuel cell vehicle in California; its emissions are water vapors. Cars are environmentally neutral as soon as they are turned off, unlike a rail system which runs nonstop for 20 hours a day, regardless of the number of people riding it. Typical passenger loads for metro rail outside two to four peak hours per day are very light. But the escalators, lights, ticket machines, etc. are all on, and station attendants and security are on-duty making it a very low productivity, low efficiency and high energy impact system.

Another startling observation is that in midday one can look at a stretch of a five billion dollar guideway. A train with 20 to 30 people passes by and then nothing happens for about 10 minutes. Now compare this to the hassle and bustle of a 6-lane freeway which in 10 minutes moves over 6,000 cars, over 10,000 people, several hundred tons of freight, and perhaps a couple of emergency vehicles. One can visualize the utter uselessness of a metro rail line as a transportation investment and the huge environmental impact of building it in the first place.

New York City's rail system carries about two thirds of all urban rail trips done in a typical work day in the entire United States. Based on national statistics, if New York City is excluded, for all other cities with rail combined, rail is far less green that today’s relatively inefficient vehicle fleet.

Myth 5: Rail can move the equivalent of 6 lanes of freeway traffic

Fact: According to city’s website honolulutransit.com [Note: Between the time this post was drafted and the time it was posted, the city changed the information presented on honolulutransit.com. The text of what was there originally can be found at http://www.gorailgo.org/benefits-of-mass-transit.html], each train can carry 300 people, and during the peak times, there is expected to be one train every 3 minutes, for a total of 6,000 people per hour on the peak direction. It is important to note that 4,000 of these 6,000 passengers will be standees.

Managed freeway lanes, such as HOT lanes, are designed to carry 2000 vehicles per hour per lane at free flow speeds, and since they carry express busses and high occupancy vehicles, the average occupancy would be well over 3 people per vehicle, for a total of 6,000 people per hour per lane. (All of them seated.)

So rail has the capacity of about one HOT lane. If Honolulu builds three reversible managed lanes (as can be seen here: http://www.eng.hawaii.edu/~panos/UHCS_ES5.pdf) the capacity advantage of the managed lanes is obvious.

Recall that in the 2006 Alternatives Analysis the city's consultant built a 2-lane managed lanes system and simultaneously removed the morning zipper lane for a net gain of one lane. This one 10 mile HOT lane performed only a little worse than 20 miles of rail line.

Myth 6: Rail is more convenient than driving or catching the bus.

Fact: For most prospective rail passengers, this is not the case. Under Hanneman’s plan, once the rail system is implemented, express bus routes will disappear, and existing bus routes will be reconfigured into feeder systems, where buses will pick people up from the neighborhoods, drop them off at the rail station, where they would then take a train to their destination station, then catch another bus to their final destination. That's two transfers per direction.

Transfers and the inconvenience of exiting and re-entering vehicles, waiting for them, going up and down escalators and through turn styles etc., and then repeating this for the trip home are an impractical routine at this day and age; a routine that was tried and progressively rejected through the times. This routine is practical only for 19th century breadwinners that only made a routine home-work-home trip. For this reason, the 2000 Census shows that only 2.09% of all urban trips in the U.S. are made in rail systems.

The Federal Transit Administration is strongly in favor of Bus Rapid Transit systems, particularly for cities under two million in population. The most recent publication cited below makes a strong case for BRT and the concept presented ties beautifully with my idea of an integrated HOT + BRT system presented in the UH Congestion Study linked above.

Advanced Network Planning for Bus Rapid Transit: The “Quickway” Model as a Modal Alternative to “Light Rail Lite”, Federal Transit Administration, February 2008,
http://www.nbrti.org/docs/pdf/BRT%20Network%20Planning%20Study%20-%20Final%20Report.pdf

City Propaganda on Rail -- Hanneman's Fake Facts 1 to 3 out of 10

Myth 1: Honolulu will get $900 million from the federal government to help pay for the cost of rail.

Fact: The New Starts program, which would be funding the rail project has its funds allocated until 2010. The rail is nowhere on its list, meaning that we would have to wait until 2011, at the earliest to receive even a chance of getting federal funding.

The $900 is just a figure that the mayor made up and had some politicians or paid consultants repeat it. In constant 2006 dollars we will not get much over $750 million. Note that the New Starts program of the Federal Transit Administration is funded at a level of $1.8 billion for the whole country! Meanwhile, the Highway Trust Fund is broke, so past 2010 it is likely that there will be minimal federal funds for transportation infrastructure.

While the rail project is intended to be funded by the 0.5% increase that was added to the 4% general excise tax (GET) as well as an assumed $900 million from the federal government, if we limited the project to those funds, we would be deep in the red. As of April 2008, 16 months into the tax increase’s fifteen-year lifespan, a total of $211 million was collected, of which the state takes 10% for administrative costs. The city, therefore, after taking out the 10%, is receiving approximately $140 million annually, for a total of $2.1 billion over the life of the increase. That is just over a third of the cost of the $6.4 billion rail project without the federal money, and just under two-thirds of the cost if Honolulu receives all of the funds it would be asking for.

Therefore, a major increase in the property taxes is necessary to complete the 34 mile route to UH and Waikiki. That does not even account for the substantial downturn in U.S. economy and Hawaii tourism which is just getting started.

Another important point here is the cost of rails, trains and other electromechanical systems. All these will be bought from a foreign country or the mainland at a cost of over one billion dollars. So, even if Oahu receives $900 million in federal aid, all of it will be spend on the mainland and in foreign suppliers. No federal funds will ever reach Oahu.

Myth 2: Rail will reduce traffic congestion.

Fact: The congestion on the roads will be far worse with rail than it is today. According to the city’s Alternatives analysis, the H-1 freeway, currently carries almost 11,000 vehicles during the peak hour. In 2030 with rail, the same lanes are predicted to be carrying over 17,000 vehicles in the peak hour – an increase of over 50%. We know that the freeway is at capacity already and cannot carry additional traffic. Any additional traffic will simply have to wait in line for increasingly longer times before being able to go through. What does this mean for 2030?

These 17,000 vehicles carry well over 25,000 people in one hour. The rail has a maximum capacity per hour of 9,000 (and 6,000 of them will be standees.) In 2030, the rail is predicted to run nearly full. So these 25,000 people per hour cannot go on the rail and have to use their cars. Their commute will be over two hours long. Do you see how useless the expenditure of $6.4 billion for rail is?

It is also pure fantasy to point to the rail as a savior when there is an incident on the freeway. Nobody can leave their car on the freeway and jump on the rail line. A reversible set of managed lanes can be easily configured to address an major road closure and these lanes will be a life saver for critical emergencies. Rail will be of no use during and after a hurricane.

I feel for the Waianae coast residents that have to endure nearly a two hour commute every day. Rail will make it much longer regardless of whether they drive or catch the rail. I shiver with the thought of someone having a health emergency in Waianae in rush hour. There is simply no roadway capacity either now or in 2030 to take him or her to a major hospital in a reasonable time for survival. Rail simply takes current conditions and makes them twice as bad in 2030. The story is similar for Ewa Beach, Wahiawa and Mililani. Only reversible lanes can provide the needed capacity for tolerable commuting times and timely emergency responses.

Myth 3: Rail is fast.

Fact: The rail line is expected to average only about 25 miles per hour, and is predicted to be slower than travel by car between Aiea (Pearlridge) and Downtown. Using data from the city-generated Alternatives Analysis and simulating a commute from the H1/H2 merge to Aloha tower, a rail transit line would reduce H-1 congestion approximately 3%, reducing drive times from 34 to 33 minutes. A rail commuter would make the same trip in approximately 41 minutes. Note that rail takes longer than driving.

If managed lanes and bus rapid transit (BRT), or rail, were available today, a trip from Kapolei to the UH at Manoa would take 50 minutes by bus and 42 minutes by car on the managed lanes and BRT system. The same trip on rail transit would take 75 minutes. Like TheBoat, TheRail will not provide time competitive service and our figures do not include additional travel times for connections and transfers on rail.

City Transportation Priorities: Phoenix versus Honolulu

The American Association of State and Highway Officials reports this week that Arizona finished the freeway network in Phoenix area that was authorized by voters 23 years ago.

The Arizona Department of Transportation completed a 137-mile regional freeway network in July 2008. The $195 million project to finish the final 4.8-mile stretch of Loop 202 opened three months ahead of schedule. Its completion marks the end of a Phoenix regional freeway enhancement plan, known as Proposition 300, that Maricopa County voters approved in 1985. The proposition authorized a half-cent sales tax dedicated to freeway construction.

“The project represents the culmination of a 20-year partnership between the public, the Arizona Department of Transportation, local cities and tribal governments, and the Maricopa Association of Governments,” ADOT Director Victor Mendez said in a news release announcing Loop 202’s completion Sunday. “It is the final segment of Arizona’s largest-ever public-works project. On a national scale, our progress is unprecedented.”

ADOT is now working on a subsequent transportation plan known as Proposition 400. The blueprint, endorsed by voters in 2004, includes additional freeway, street, and transit construction. As can be seen in the Proposition 400 report the transportation revenue is allocated as follows: 56.2% on freeways, 10.5% on arterial streets and 33.3% on the public transportation fund which includes regional bus services, special transportation services (like Hawaii’s HnadiVan), and high capacity transit services such as light rail, bus rapid transit and express buses.

It is depressing to realize that if the proposed rail goes ahead on Oahu, about 70% of the entire transportation budget on Oahu will go to fund public transportation that will serve about 10% of the trips. This is why both rail and the current mayor must be stopped.

The same progressive city, Phoenix, in which people are flocking in (as opposed to oppressed and overtaxed Honolulu which is actually losing population) did a careful cost analysis of rail, HOT lanes and other major transportation infrastructure. The cost per passenger mile was reported as follows:

HOT lane = 1.2 to 2.7 ¢
General purpose lane = 1.9 to 4.2 ¢
HOV and bus lane = 2.6 to 5.7 ¢
Exclusive bus lane = 6.6 to 14.7 ¢
Light rail line = 16.1 to 35.8 ¢

Notably, for Phoenix, HOT lanes are roughly ten times cheaper per passenger mile than light rail. Furthermore, comparing these costs to the over 1,000 cents per passenger mile of Honolulu’s fully elevated heavy rail proposal, makes it clear that a $6 billion rail project is entirely inappropriate for Honolulu

Parsons Brinkerhoff: HOT Lanes “benefit everyone”

The above was just one of the findings of the Congestion Relief Analysis, a report conducted by the Washington State Department of Transportation, with much assistance from many consulting firms, among which was Parsons Brinkerhoff. The report’s purpose was to answer two questions: “What would it take to significantly reduce expected future traffic delay due to congestion in the State’s major urban areas?” and “What are the associated costs and impacts?”, questions which are also being asked by many here in Honolulu.

Instead of looking for and finding solutions to Honolulu’s congestion problems, the Hannemann administration has chosen to pursue, from the beginning, an elevated heavy rail system, which every analysis has shown to do little or nothing to reduce traffic congestion.

The Washington DOT report, in a section titled “Why is Congestion Growing in the State”, two points are made which also exemplify the source of Honolulu’s congestion woes:

[1] Capacity expansion has not kept up with the pace of population and travel demand growth, resulting in an imbalance between demand and capacity.

[2] Most travelers are auto dependent due to lack of population and employment density, which is essential to make alternative travel options more viable.

Several alternatives were studied in the Washington DOT report. Each one was analyzed with the goal of maximum congestion relief in mind. One of the alternatives was transit, which included busses and rail as the only means of reducing congestion – exactly as proposed by Hanneman. The study found that (bolding added for emphasis):

“Major transit expansion in the adjacent urban areas [Seattle, Tacoma, Spokane and Vancouver] would provide an alternative to single occupancy vehicles for people traveling congested corridors during peak periods. However, according to the computer modeling, transit expansion alone is not shown to be effective in reducing total delay at the system level. The lack of supportive land use densities and the difficulty in serving non-commute travel limits the ability of transit to serve trips that are now customarily made by auto.”

High occupancy toll (HOT) lanes, with value pricing (tolls which vary depending on congestion levels), similar to what I propose, were, however, deemed effective solutions:

“Region-wide value pricing is indicated to be very effective in reducing total delay. Roadway tolling helps to dampen travel demand, shorten trips, shift travel to non-peak periods, and encourage use of other travel options (transit, carpooling, biking and walking) that are not subject to toll charges.

Value pricing in the form of High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes is found to reduce corridor delay and make the corridor operate more efficiently. HOT lanes make corridor travel time more reliable, which benefits everyone, including occasional users.”

Honolulutraffic.com also has a commentary and link to the Washington State DOT report.

The main lessons for Honolulu are that (1) fixed mass transit is an inferior solution, and (2) An express transitway for high-occupancy (HO) buses, vanpools and carpools, and toll-paying (T) low occupancy vehicles is an effective solution to congestion and mobility. HOT lanes combined with Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is an affordable, effective and sustainable solution for Oahu.

Not only is the Bay Area developing a network of HOT lanes, but an extensive application of HOT lanes is also getting done in Washington, D.C. (Capital Beltway HOT Lanes: http://www.virginiahotlanes.com/) On the other hand, also in 2008, an expansion to the D.C. Metro was not funded.