Let’s briefly analyze how 20 miles of rail with 21 stations and 10 miles of HOT lanes would score in an application in Honolulu based on three goals and six NTPP metrics that were presented in a previous blog.
In order to reach a bottom line, the best alternative for each goal will receive a score of 10 and the second best will receive a relative score between 0 and 10.
Note that these metrics address deeper goals and treat congestion as an outcome. For congestion relief alone HOT lanes would score a 10 and rail a 1.
In this part we focus on NTPP goal 1 which is Economic Growth. This goal has four metrics but two of them relate to long-distance commerce and travel; they apply to Hawaii when maritime or air transportation is considered.
Brief System Descriptions
RAIL: Fully elevated heavy rail starting about a mile east of Kapolei in the middle of prime agricultural land (presently Aloun and other farms) and ending inside Ala Moana Center with 21 stations and three or four park and ride facilities accommodating fewer than 5,000 cars. Headways are 3 minutes in peak periods, 6 minutes off peak. Trains have a capacity of 300 people of which two thirds are standees. Double track design with no express trains. The system will recover 0% of the capital costs and only 10%-20% of its O&M costs from fares. Capital cost estimated at $5.4 Billion and annual O&M cost at $70 Million/year.
HOT Lanes: 10 miles of elevated 3-lane reversible expressway designed for High Occupancy and Toll operation where buses and large carpools enter free. Low and solo occupancy vehicles pay a graduated toll (e.g., from $0.50 to $5.00). The toll is “congestion insurance.” Paying the toll guarantees 50 mph travel at all times. Higher tolls are necessary to discourage overloading. The facility has Aloha Stadium as its anchor (mid-point) and has exits at Pearl Harbor, Lagoon Drive and Waiakamilo. It starts at the H-1/H-2 merge and ends in Iwilei. The 2.2 miles from Keehi Interchange to Iwilei is a shovel ready project (signed EIS) as “The Nimitz Viaduct.) The system will recover at least one third of its capital costs and 100% of its O&M costs from tolls. Capital cost estimated at $1.7 Billion and annual O&M cost at $20 Million/year.
Access to Jobs and Labor (metropolitan accessibility)
RAIL: National research has shown that rail’s limited reach does not help the jobless to find jobs and is not helpful for those with multiple jobs; and we have many of the latter on Oahu. Rail is a mode for white collar commuters; this is a relatively small market in Hawaii’s service oriented and dispersed industry. Many workers drop off or pick up children from school before work; rail is no good for them. Combinations of rail and bus and walk for door-to-door travel result in uncompetitive travel times compared to direct bus, carpool or car modes. Rail’s original score of 4 is further reduced by 2 points because rail is incapable of providing transportations for goods and services which are vital for the economy and part of this criterion. Score = 4-2 = 2.
HOT Lanes: Nationally HOT lanes is the solution for rapid transportation and the best way to make express buses competitive with the auto and succeed in getting people “out of their cars.” An express bus from Waikele or Waipio on the HOT lanes would reach downtown in under 20 minutes in the middle of rush hour. These express buses can continue to major destinations in Kalihi, Kakaako, Waikiki, and UH. Also Oahu has among the nation’s highest carpool and vanpool rates. HOT lanes are designed to serve these high occupancy modes. HOT lanes provide fast travel for the provision of services (e.g., an electrician can get from Kapolei to Kalihi in under 30 minutes at 7 AM) and offer congestion relief to parallel routes (e.g., H-1 Freeway) which is used heavily for transporting goods. Score = 10.
Access to Non-work Activities (metropolitan accessibility)
RAIL: A very small portion of the population should be expected to use rail for non-work activities such as groceries, shopping, social visits, school events, soccer practice, night clubbing, out on a date, etc. Rail loses 1 point for being unable to be of any use during an emergency such as freeway closure, flooding, hurricane and tsunami. Score = 6-1 = 5.
HOT Lanes: The Honolulu design is for a reversible configuration which is tailored to serve commuting flows so it only partially improves access to the variety of non-work activities that people engage in. It is tailored however to work well for large events at Aloha Stadium by working in-bound to the stadium before the event starts and out-bound at event’s end for quick evacuation. The HOT lanes can also serve as a reliable emergency-only backbone during an emergency. Score = 10.
Summary
Based on the Economic Growth goal and its two metrics, HOT Lanes score 20 points and Elevated Rail scores 7 points.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
NTPP Transportation Performance Metrics
The National Transportation Policy Project sponsored by the Bipartisan Policy Center produced Performance Driven: New Vision for U.S. Transportation Policy
“This report presents the findings of an intensive, two year effort to develop multi-stakeholder consensus recommendations for a forward-looking American transportation policy. This report is the product of a bipartisan group of 26 members of diverse expertise and affiliations, addressing many complex and contentious topics.”
The report states that “Without clearly articulated goals, it is not surprising that there has been little accountability for the performance of most federal transportation programs and projects to date. The result has been an emphasis on revenue sharing and process, rather than on results. There is no federal requirement to optimize “returns” on public investments, and current programs are not structured to reward positive outcomes, or even to document them.”
As an actionable item the Project developed specific performance metrics. “The performance metrics, must be fair, transparent, and free of bias toward particular transportation modes or geographic regions. The list below summarizes the performance metrics NTPP recommends for measuring performance.”
Economic Growth
(1) Access to jobs and labor (metropolitan accessibility)
(2) Access to non-work activities (metropolitan accessibility)
Energy and Environment
(1) Petroleum consumption
(2) CO2 emissions
Safety
(1) Fatalities and injuries per capita
(2) Fatalities and injuries per Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
The report provides a lot of details and concludes that “Fundamental reform is needed. The alternative is to allow America’s transportation systems to continue to fall short of meeting the multi-faceted demands increasingly being placed on them—with collective costs to the economy, our quality of life, and the environment that can only grow over time.”
NEXT BLOG: Performance Metrics Comparison of Honolulu’s Heavy Rail and HOT Lane Proposals.
“This report presents the findings of an intensive, two year effort to develop multi-stakeholder consensus recommendations for a forward-looking American transportation policy. This report is the product of a bipartisan group of 26 members of diverse expertise and affiliations, addressing many complex and contentious topics.”
The report states that “Without clearly articulated goals, it is not surprising that there has been little accountability for the performance of most federal transportation programs and projects to date. The result has been an emphasis on revenue sharing and process, rather than on results. There is no federal requirement to optimize “returns” on public investments, and current programs are not structured to reward positive outcomes, or even to document them.”
As an actionable item the Project developed specific performance metrics. “The performance metrics, must be fair, transparent, and free of bias toward particular transportation modes or geographic regions. The list below summarizes the performance metrics NTPP recommends for measuring performance.”
Economic Growth
(1) Access to jobs and labor (metropolitan accessibility)
(2) Access to non-work activities (metropolitan accessibility)
Energy and Environment
(1) Petroleum consumption
(2) CO2 emissions
Safety
(1) Fatalities and injuries per capita
(2) Fatalities and injuries per Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
The report provides a lot of details and concludes that “Fundamental reform is needed. The alternative is to allow America’s transportation systems to continue to fall short of meeting the multi-faceted demands increasingly being placed on them—with collective costs to the economy, our quality of life, and the environment that can only grow over time.”
NEXT BLOG: Performance Metrics Comparison of Honolulu’s Heavy Rail and HOT Lane Proposals.
Monday, October 4, 2010
The Triumph of Pork over Purpose [Needs to Be Reversed]
The article with the "spot on" title Pork over Purpose was published on a most unfortunate date (the day before 9/11/2001) in a most unlikely publication, The Blueprint of the Democratic Leadership Council. The DLC provides perspective and advice to elected Democrats.
The Triumph of Pork over Purpose was written by David Luberoff of Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government.
Notable highlights of the article include the following.
There is no national purpose driving federal highway and transit funding programs. Instead, a variety of special interests -- from contractors and unions to environmentalists and urbanists -- have come to view the national highway and transit program as an opportunity. [Interestingly most environmentalists and urbanists are strongly against the proposed elevated rail for Honolulu, so the project is politician and union driven.]
Earmarked funding for an increasing number of projects: There were only a handful of earmarks in the 1982 act reauthorizing highway and transit laws, but the 1987 measure contained funding for about 150 specific projects --one of the rationales President Reagan cited in his unsuccessful veto of that law. In contrast, no one blinked an eye when ISTEA earmarked money for more than 500 highway and transit projects or when TEA-21 included more than 1,800 earmarks. [Earmarks is one manifestation of pork over purpose. But there are several other ways to promote pork. For example one can declare carbon emissions an enemy and start throwing money at anything that promises carbon emissions reductions. Then "green" causes a lot of real red. The huge deficits of Spain and California prove this.]
The prospect of significant federal funding drives states and localities to build projects that they never would undertake if they had to fund even a significant portion of the costs themselves. For example, the funding strategy for virtually every major rail transit project built in the last three decades -- from Los Angeles' Red Line to Seattle's current troubled project -- has been predicated on securing significant federal funding for those projects because local officials knew that local voters would never have approved local taxes needed to fully fund those projects. [It's worth repeating that 80% to 90% of the funding for H-1, H-2 and H-3 freeways came from FHWA, but only about 25% of the funding for rail may come from the FTA.]
The pressure for special projects and programs creates a process that is politically compelling but one that also is far from economically efficient. And that means that we're not spending the money we have in ways likely to produce significant positive payoffs by either making the economy more efficient or improving the quality of many people's lives. [This is another spot on statement: Infrastructure is paid by taxes. If the wrong infrastructure is built, then taxes are simply wasted.]
The four highlights above --that are worth about 30 Billion Dollars in Hawaii and over One Trillion Dollars in the U.S. as a whole-- explain why I am motivated to seek high elected office with power over infrastructure decisions.
The Triumph of Pork over Purpose was written by David Luberoff of Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government.
Notable highlights of the article include the following.
There is no national purpose driving federal highway and transit funding programs. Instead, a variety of special interests -- from contractors and unions to environmentalists and urbanists -- have come to view the national highway and transit program as an opportunity. [Interestingly most environmentalists and urbanists are strongly against the proposed elevated rail for Honolulu, so the project is politician and union driven.]
Earmarked funding for an increasing number of projects: There were only a handful of earmarks in the 1982 act reauthorizing highway and transit laws, but the 1987 measure contained funding for about 150 specific projects --one of the rationales President Reagan cited in his unsuccessful veto of that law. In contrast, no one blinked an eye when ISTEA earmarked money for more than 500 highway and transit projects or when TEA-21 included more than 1,800 earmarks. [Earmarks is one manifestation of pork over purpose. But there are several other ways to promote pork. For example one can declare carbon emissions an enemy and start throwing money at anything that promises carbon emissions reductions. Then "green" causes a lot of real red. The huge deficits of Spain and California prove this.]
The prospect of significant federal funding drives states and localities to build projects that they never would undertake if they had to fund even a significant portion of the costs themselves. For example, the funding strategy for virtually every major rail transit project built in the last three decades -- from Los Angeles' Red Line to Seattle's current troubled project -- has been predicated on securing significant federal funding for those projects because local officials knew that local voters would never have approved local taxes needed to fully fund those projects. [It's worth repeating that 80% to 90% of the funding for H-1, H-2 and H-3 freeways came from FHWA, but only about 25% of the funding for rail may come from the FTA.]
The pressure for special projects and programs creates a process that is politically compelling but one that also is far from economically efficient. And that means that we're not spending the money we have in ways likely to produce significant positive payoffs by either making the economy more efficient or improving the quality of many people's lives. [This is another spot on statement: Infrastructure is paid by taxes. If the wrong infrastructure is built, then taxes are simply wasted.]
The four highlights above --that are worth about 30 Billion Dollars in Hawaii and over One Trillion Dollars in the U.S. as a whole-- explain why I am motivated to seek high elected office with power over infrastructure decisions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
