Rail Transit

[GeckoGeek]

Re: Rail Transit

Isn't it politics too if Panos represents special interests, in this case, taxi companies, private bus companies, auto dealers, etc? These people have no problems with tolls because they won't be paying them, they will just pass that on to the end customer.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Are they supporting Panos' view, or did they drivers find a front man?

I'd have to go find my old material, but I've heard arguments about what should be done before rail became a hot topic. I'd have to check and make sure it's Pano. I'm thinking it's a case of the drivers supporting Panos rather then Panos being a paid spokesman for special interests.

I have to ask, if Panos is such an expert, why is he the only academic pushing this so hard? Why aren't his fellow colleagues at UH endorsing his solution?

You'd have to ask Adrian Archilla and C S Papacostas. Maybe they don't like the limelight. The 3 of them make the sum total of traffic experts I can find on the UH website.

So where are the studies that says this is the best way to solve the traffic problem? Rail only solves the problem for people on the rail line. We can't just turn our back on the roadways and say "rail will solve that". Rail isn't even addressing our economic engine: tourism. At this point I think rail is only going to serve the big special interests. Only peripherally will it address the public interests and certainly isn't interested in the tax payer's interests.

[joshuatree]

Re: Rail Transit

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Are they supporting Panos' view, or did they drivers find a front man?

I'd have to go find my old material, but I've heard arguments about what should be done before rail became a hot topic. I'd have to check and make sure it's Pano. I'm thinking it's a case of the drivers supporting Panos rather then Panos being a paid spokesman for special interests.




You'd have to ask Adrian Archilla and C S Papacostas. Maybe they don't like the limelight. The 3 of them make the sum total of traffic experts I can find on the UH website.

So where are the studies that says this is the best way to solve the traffic problem? Rail only solves the problem for people on the rail line. We can't just turn our back on the roadways and say "rail will solve that". Rail isn't even addressing our economic engine: tourism. At this point I think rail is only going to serve the big special interests. Only peripherally will it address the public interests and certainly isn't interested in the tax payer's interests.

I don't believe Panos is doing this out of just good intentions, if he did, he doesn't need to be on honolulutraffic.com. He can just simply present his views. Limelight or not, there's been nada on what they think of Panos's solution. It doesn't mean they have to stand in front of a camera. Even a written email or article, nada.

People who are anti-rail are looking at this as a black and white scenario. What's the best way? There is no best way. This isn't about turning one's back on roadways. This is about certain elements just not giving the public any choice. And the rail addresses the economic engine directly, just not in the way some businesses want. If a tourist has a decent way of getting around town cheaply, it's gonna hurt the bus companies, the taxi companies, etc. This is why there's such a coordinated campaign for a toll road. Notice it's not just about stopping rail. It's a campaign on building a toll road which buses can happen to use. The bus sales pitch is just to make a toll road seem like it's serving the public. You think Panos is gonna get on a bus?

Who exactly is the big special interest in your mind?

[GeckoGeek]

Re: Rail Transit

Who exactly is the big special interest in your mind?

- The company that wins the rail contract
- The construction industry (how long do you think it will take?)
- The unions
- The land owners/developers near the rail stations

I'd say the special interests for rail have a track history of more power then the ones against rail. Taxi drivers? Bus drivers? Pish!

Since I don't see myself on mass transit (because of where I live, where I work, and my line of work), I'm more interested in what will relieve traffic congestion. I don't think anyone is saying rail will do it.

[joshuatree]

Re: Rail Transit

- The company that wins the rail contract
- The construction industry (how long do you think it will take?)
- The unions
- The land owners/developers near the rail stations

I'd say the special interests for rail have a track history of more power then the ones against rail. Taxi drivers? Bus drivers? Pish!

Since I don't see myself on mass transit (because of where I live, where I work, and my line of work), I'm more interested in what will relieve traffic congestion. I don't think anyone is saying rail will do it.

So do you support a tollway instead? Unless we've decided to build nothing, any solution will have special interests.

I.E. for tollway.

- the company that wins the tollway contract
- the construction industry (remember H3? can be very long too)
- the same unions
- the bus and taxi companies, not just the drivers
- Oahu's auto dealerships
- oil companies
- land owners/developers near the proposed on/offramps for a tollway

I do see myself on mass transit and for every person like me that will use it, it's one less car on the road competing with you. I don't see a tollway as money well spent because while it's cheaper up front, it does nothing to address the root source of traffic congestion, growing number of licensed drivers and vehicles on the road. People say the development plans that is associated with the rail project as a bad thing but if you want more people to get out of their cars, you need developments that are not auto centric. What's the biggest grip about rail from auto users? Oh, it's not convenient for me to do my chores. You need to start bringing the stores, homes, etc closer to the rail. It's not for everyone, but for every one that moves to the rail oriented communities, it's one less person vying for the road.

[GeckoGeek]

Re: Rail Transit

any solution will have special interests.

True enough.

any solution will have special interests.

I.E. for tollway.

- the company that wins the tollway contract

Uhhh, there's no "lock" on a tollway. Once you select a rail technology, you're locked in to a small selection of mainland vendors. No local company builds railroads, rail cars, etc. And once the vendor is selected you have to keep going back to that vendor to maintain the train for the life of the train. Depending on the details of the railroad, you might not be able to change vendors. At least not easily.

Buses can be bought from the lowest bidder at the time they are bought. You can change and mix vendors on a single roadway - just like we do now.

- the construction industry (remember H3? can be very long too)
- the same unions

I think you'll find the construction project will be much smaller. One of the arguments for tollway is that it's lighter then "light" rail, so the structure is lighter and needs fewer pillars to hold it up. (and cheaper) So it seems to me there's less to construct. Guess which one the above would favor?

- the bus and taxi companies, not just the drivers
- Oahu's auto dealerships

While not powerless, I see them as far down the totem pole on the political power scale.

- oil companies

I doubt if Hawaii has their attention. It's not even a drop in the bucket for them.

- land owners/developers near the proposed on/offramps for a tollway

With a toll road, the benefit is within driving distance of the ramps. With a train station, it's within walking distance. Three guesses which brings a greater benefit for the few?

I do see myself on mass transit and for every person like me that will use it, it's one less car on the road competing with you.

I'm impressed! Very few seem to think they'll actually ride. They see mass transit as being good for someone else.

But I'm going by the studies that say rail won't improve on the current condition, but only prevent it from getting worse as fast.

[Random]

Re: Rail Transit

Since I don't see myself on mass transit (because of where I live, where I work, and my line of work), I'm more interested in what will relieve traffic congestion. I don't think anyone is saying rail will do it.

What will? How can you tell millions of whining drivers complaining about the traffic congestion that he should get his own car off the road since he's part of the problem?

[sansei]

Re: Rail Transit

hi this is sansei and i remember responding to this only i've spoken with my eldest sister about rail vs toll highway's or elevated highway's and she said that toll or elevated Highway's wouldnt work here and that the only one would is rail is it's is a good ride and it get's a person from place to place and my eldest sister live's in SF and she say's that for her,she use's muni buses which are like a part of rail only it's a type of bus that run's steel on steel and she mention's that steel on steel isnt noisy so i thought to share this with everyone.

well thank's for your time

[joshuatree]

Re: Rail Transit

Uhhh, there's no "lock" on a tollway. Once you select a rail technology, you're locked in to a small selection of mainland vendors. No local company builds railroads, rail cars, etc. And once the vendor is selected you have to keep going back to that vendor to maintain the train for the life of the train. Depending on the details of the railroad, you might not be able to change vendors. At least not easily.

Buses can be bought from the lowest bidder at the time they are bought. You can change and mix vendors on a single roadway - just like we do now.

What do you mean there's no lock? A tollway is operated by a winning bidder that owns it for 30-40 years. You can't break that contract without hefty penalties. In addition, there's not a whole lot of companies that make the equipment to do nonstop toll collecting with the sensor and the readers.

This is a really big myth perpetrated by anti-rail folks. The biggest reason why steel on steel was chosen is because there are multiple companies that make rail cars running on steel tracks, the components to the management system, etc. I would recommend reading the city's RFI and the responses from the rail companies. If you check out Bombardier's solution, it's really high tech for steel on steel. Linear induction motors to propel the car and to stop the car. Maglev without the lev. Steerable axles to reduce noise. Lower skirts to absorb and deflect the noise. Completely driverless, even the proposed train yard does not require drivers to park/move the cars.

I think you'll find the construction project will be much smaller. One of the arguments for tollway is that it's lighter then "light" rail, so the structure is lighter and needs fewer pillars to hold it up. (and cheaper) So it seems to me there's less to construct. Guess which one the above would favor?

Okay, we need to dispel another myth. Light rail compared to heavy rail doesn't mean tonnage or weight of the cars. "Light" means non-grade separated, it mingles with auto and foot traffic. "Heavy" means dedicated, right of way. If anything "heavies" are lighter because the cars do not have to be made to withstand auto crashes. BART in the Bay Area is relatively light in weight because it's made of fiberglass.

If we're simply comparing an equal length route, the tollway would require pillars and more material because of the wider emergency shoulder lanes and on/offramps.

I doubt if Hawaii has their attention. It's not even a drop in the bucket for them.

Why wouldn't the rail project attract the attention of the local oil industry? The two refineries that sell the gas consumed, the tar for asphalt, etc? Or the network of gas station owners?

With a toll road, the benefit is within driving distance of the ramps. With a train station, it's within walking distance. Three guesses which brings a greater benefit for the few?

This really won't be answered till built. If the city plans right and really coordinates bus with rail, the bus can go way deeper into neighborhoods so the fear of walking great distances is exaggerated. Did you know 20% of the bus's fleet is already pass retirement age? If we have rail, we can replace those retiring buses with shorter 30ft ones instead of the standard 40ft. The shorter ones can easily go into neighborhoods. I also find it a bit ironic that people complain about walking to catch public transit, then get in their car and drive over to gold's gym to work out. The irony......

[Creative-1]

Re: Rail Transit

The Mayor's own numbers, released last month predicted rail would take 800 cars an hour off Leeward roads.

BUT, there are over 8,000 cars an hour on the roads now and they predict 16,000 an hour in 2020.

So, with rail, Leeward rush hour traffic will be twice as bad. That's not much bang for $4.6 billion bucks.

[GeckoGeek]

Re: Rail Transit

What will? How can you tell millions of whining drivers complaining about the traffic congestion that he should get his own car off the road since he's part of the problem?

No easy answer to that. But getting traffic to flow would be a big help.

A tollway is operated by a winning bidder that owns it for 30-40 years.

IF that's the way you set up the finances.

So, with rail, Leeward rush hour traffic will be twice as bad. That's not much bang for $4.6 billion bucks.

That's where I have a big problem. At $5.75 million per car, wouldn't it be cheaper to pay people to not work? Just hold a lottery of all commuters and pick 1600 and pay them to stay home for one year.

[Creative-1]

Re: Rail Transit

At $5.75 million per car, wouldn't it be cheaper to pay people to not work? Just hold a lottery of all commuters and pick 1600 and pay them to stay home for one year.

I suggested to Mayor Hannemann that, instead of building rail, we use 10% of the money (and leave the other 90% in taxpayer's pockets) to create tax incentives for companies to create jobs in the leeward area.

Many states have $3-5,000 tax credits per job created over a five year period of time. If it took $10,000 to get companies to create each job, we could create 46,000 jobs in the leeward area.

I'm sure those getting up at 5 AM to fight traffic into town from Ewa or Mililani would probably prefer a 10 minute drive (or walk or bike) to work.

The environmentalists would love it.

Mufi said the legislature wrote the law requiring the money be spent on transit. I think that's a cop out. I'm sure they'd re-write the law to allow for this solution if the city council asked them to.

Am I missing something? It seems like the best solution is to (seriously) encourage job formation so those stuck in traffic would not NEED to drive into town.

Bob Sigall

[Random]

Re: Rail Transit

I suggested to Mayor Hannemann that, instead of building rail, we use 10% of the money (and leave the other 90% in taxpayer's pockets) to create tax incentives for companies to create jobs in the leeward area.

You want companies in Honolulu area to move up to Kapolei?

That's more like displacing the traffic congestion into a different area. Now Downtown Honolulu residents who have the enjoyed the luxury of a short perhaps walking trips to their job will have to commute to leeward.

What about long-time leeward commuters who worked in a downtown workplace for over 10 years? Do you think they can up and leave their old job, possibly lose their pension, to work for a new job in Kapolei?

[TuNnL]

Re: on our soon to be rail tranisit

The train will not reduce traffic congestion. It is a waste of tax money

In all the cities on the mainland where rail has been built, rail did nothing to improve traffic congestion. Honolulu will not be any different.

The thing you guys keep forgetting to mention is the study done by the city shows traffic congestion won’t improve over CURRENT conditions. It’s also the position of the city that if they DON’T build rail, traffic will be even WORSE then it is NOW. If you are going to argue a position, state all the facts, don’t just cherry-pick the ones that support you.

The money could be much better spent on things like a tunnel or bridge under/over Pearl Harbor to Ewa, or extending the airport viaduct down Nimitz Hwy. Such projects *will* improve traffic congestion, but our mayor isn't smart enough to see that.

I trust you have some kind of formal study that backs you up on this? Or are we playing “my theory is better than your theory”?

[joshuatree]

Re: on our soon to be rail tranisit

IF that's the way you set up the finances.

Ok, I don't get what you are trying to say with that statement but that is how most tollways are operated. A winning company "owns" the tollway for 30/40 years to recuperate the build cost and to profit. They usually have a clause too so if the project fails, the taxpayer bails out the company. Little details pro-toll folks like to hide from the public, thus making tollways look like a dream. Sydney's cross tunnel was a fiasco the gov't had to bail out.

The thing you guys keep forgetting to mention is the study done by the city shows traffic congestion won’t improve over CURRENT conditions. It’s also the position of the city that if they DON’T build rail, traffic will be even WORSE then it is NOW. If you are going to argue a position, state all the facts, don’t just cherry-pick the ones that support you.

Thank you, that is what peeves me. It's not that rail is a silver bullet to the problem, but this cherry picking of facts to argue about the rail project is very deceitful.

[GeckoGeek]

Re: Rail Transit

Am I missing something? It seems like the best solution is to (seriously) encourage job formation so those stuck in traffic would not NEED to drive into town.

Nothing for special interest groups. </cynic>

What about long-time leeward commuters who worked in a downtown workplace for over 10 years? Do you think they can up and leave their old job, possibly lose their pension, to work for a new job in Kapolei?

The hope, over the long term, is that people will work near where they live and live near where they work. It's not something that will happen immediately, but over a 5-10-20 year period, that's the way individual choices would go.

I trust you have some kind of formal study that backs you up on this? Or are we playing “my theory is better than your theory”?

Talk to Panos. It may not be a "formal study" by your definition, but he's got enough expertise to not be ignored.

Ok, I don't get what you are trying to say with that statement but that is how most tollways are operated.

Just because that's the way that most do it, doesn't mean we have to do it that way if that's what's bothering you.