Rail Transit

[salmoned]

I just pointed out that comparing road spending to rail spending is a strawman argument because road spending cannot and will not be decreased or supplanted by rail spending. Rail or no rail, roads must be built and maintained. Do you deny it?

Again, you want to compare apples to oranges. Separating rail farebox recovery from bus farebox recovery will not be possible if the systems are integrated. Will the combined farebox recovery increase or decrease with an integrated bus/rail transit system? Also, if the systems are not integrated, will we be paying 2 or 3 fares to go from Ewa to downtown or Hawaii Kai?

Let's pretend your rail operating farebox recovery percentages are accurate, how much upfront expense is that 13% increase in recovery worth? How many actual dollars will be saved in comparison to the amount spent in seeking that savings? I believe it would be comparable to spending a million dollars to buy a car with 40 mpg rating versus keeping your current car with 27mpg rating. Does that make sense to you? [Actually, I have exaggerated the rail benefit in this comparison because it only applies to a small segment of the total transit system rather than all our transit needs]

Now, if we didn't have motor vehicles and there were no roads and motor vehicles couldn't be made more fuel efficient and all future development was restricted to the rail line, then rail might make some economic sense for Oahu, maybe.

[joshuatree]

I just pointed out that comparing road spending to rail spending is a strawman argument because road spending cannot and will not be decreased or supplanted by rail spending. Rail or no rail, roads must be built and maintained. Do you deny it?

Again, you want to compare apples to oranges. Separating rail farebox recovery from bus farebox recovery will not be possible if the systems are integrated. Will the combined farebox recovery increase or decrease with an integrated bus/rail transit system? Also, if the systems are not integrated, will we be paying 2 or 3 fares to go from Ewa to downtown or Hawaii Kai?

Let's pretend your rail operating farebox recovery percentages are accurate, how much upfront expense is that 13% increase in recovery worth? How many actual dollars will be saved in comparison to the amount spent in seeking that savings? I believe it would be comparable to spending a million dollars to buy a car with 40 mpg rating versus keeping your current car with 27mpg rating. Does that make sense to you? [Actually, I have exaggerated the rail benefit in this comparison because it only applies to a small segment of the total transit system rather than all our transit needs]

Now, if we didn't have motor vehicles and there were no roads and motor vehicles couldn't be made more fuel efficient and all future development was restricted to the rail line, then rail might make some economic sense for Oahu, maybe.

Again, I never said building rail will replace existing roads which should answer your first question. But to answer it more directly, roads of course will need to be built and maintained. I've never denied that. But at no point was rail ever propositioned as a 1:1 replacement for roads. Having said that, I do not see comparing cost of roads to rail as a strawman argument because it can keep in check the cost of roads. While rail won't replace a new road to a new neighborhood, it absolutely can replace a need for another H1.

I think an actual separation of fare into a bus fare and rail fare would be fairer to someone that as an example, rides a local bus segment and never touches the rail segment. But the administrative and logistical overhead of doing this far outweighs the benefit until ridership hits a certain threshold. Same rationale for us going with an honor fare system for now.

But you can still compare farebox recovery of bus to rail because the route rail runs will replace that bus route. So you have X amount brought in by fares and you compare that to bus op cost and to rail op cost.

Your final question about how much is spent in order to get that 13% savings advantage is understandable. I know what you are saying. But the answer depends on the length of time you apply your question to. If it's 13% annually, the cost of building the system can be recovered in a certain time frame. I guess what bothers people would be what is an acceptable time frame. 10 years? 20? 30?

I also believe the system integrated will actually help increase public transit ridership overall so there should be a gross increase in fare intake as well. That can speed up the time frame in recouping the project cost.

[salmoned]

You are wrong on every point.

First, there will never be a need for another H1, rail or no rail. As for expanding the capacity of H1, that is already needed and will not be resolved by rail. Mentioning roadway expenses as an argument for rail is plain misdirection.

You fail to understand that transit riders don't want a mythical 'fairer' fare system, they want one that is reasonable, both financially and logistically.

Rail will not replace any segment of the bus routes. Buses will have to run along the same roads to provide the same service, unless the service area is reduced. It is true that some long-haul routes may be cut, but short-haul routes will have to be expanded in equal or greater measure to provide equivalent service.

Finally, you forget that farebox operating expense revenue is measured as a percentage of cost - there is never a return of capital unless farebox revenue exceeds 100% of operating expense. In other words, if gross farebox receipts increase, then gross transit operating expense will increase, not decrease. There is no time frame where rail becomes less expensive than no rail [within the estimated lifespan of the rail system] and certainly there is no possibility of recouping project costs - ever.

So please, stop proving your ignorance.

[joshuatree]

You are wrong on every point.

First, there will never be a need for another H1, rail or no rail. As for expanding the capacity of H1, that is already needed and will not be resolved by rail. Mentioning roadway expenses as an argument for rail is plain misdirection.

You fail to understand that transit riders don't want a mythical 'fairer' fare system, they want one that is reasonable, both financially and logistically.

Rail will not replace any segment of the bus routes. Buses will have to run along the same roads to provide the same service, unless the service area is reduced. It is true that some long-haul routes may be cut, but short-haul routes will have to be expanded in equal or greater measure to provide equivalent service.

Finally, you forget that farebox operating expense revenue is measured as a percentage of cost - there is never a return of capital unless farebox revenue exceeds 100% of operating expense. In other words, if gross farebox receipts increase, then gross transit operating expense will increase, not decrease. There is no time frame where rail becomes less expensive than no rail [within the estimated lifespan of the rail system] and certainly there is no possibility of recouping project costs - ever.

So please, stop proving your ignorance.

Re-striping to create additional lanes (forsaken emergency lanes) and expanding the zipperlane will only do so much for the existing H1. Without any change in way of transportation, there will be the need for another freeway equivalent. It wasn't that long ago that the airport viaduct of the H1 was built. Didn't take much time to jam it up. As early as the late 1960s, there was already talk of a H4 running along the downtown waterfront.

There is nothing mythical about a fairer transit fare structure. For a rider taking a short trip, paying a lesser fare than someone who is riding end to end is very reasonable and fairer. On the same note, for someone who is riding a longer trip or an express service should be paying more. Many transit systems employ this.

Check the appendix in the FEIS, much detail on revised bus routes showing rail replacing many existing routes. The Bus is then further extended into new areas with revised or new routes so in essence, the footprint of public transit will be expanded.

We don't have to base it only on percentages. The operating cost of The Bus will be $195 million compared to $77 million for rail. Believe what you want.

[Ron Whitfield]

On top of rail opposition now getting Federal(?) historical preservation honcho backing, there's an op-ed in the new Weekly saying The Bus service is doomed to sufferring major financial cutbacks and corresponding diminished route service to important lines like the townbound Circle Island, now scheduled to end in Wahiawa instead of taking hundreds to their further destinations. The Bus money will go to rail and those depending on the bus to get them to work are looking at serious problems and may have to spend $ to buy a car they otherwise don't need or are able to afford, adding to the traffic problems and curtailling more major benefits of any possible sensible/honest rail.
Seems there's going to be no end to the disasters these nonsense rail pushers are inflicting on this island.

[Kaonohi]

Makes you want to pray for speed in global warming, and wish for an O'ahu major tsunami.
Nah. Wouldn't work, or at least wouldn't be enough.

Maybe Iran can nuke us? Or S. Korea?

[lensperson]

Only tangentially related is the fate of the railway system on the Big Island.

The system was damaged badly by a tsunami and the supporting infrastructure abandoned.

the system was designed to service the sugar mills but passenger service was adopted
after a while.

In Hilo there are a few traces of these train tracks but they are hard to find.
The original bridge across the Wailuku is probably where the "Singing Bridge"
now sits.

[Kalihiboy]

The photos fooled me at first I'll admit!!

http://www.bigislandrail.zoomshare.com/

[lensperson]

Awesome !
fooled me too.
{not to hard to do}
Nonetheless,the history of the Big Island rail transit is worthy of study and likely
to bring pleasure to students thereof

[memorylane]

I watched a movie I rented from Netflix called The Ride and most of it was meant to be set in 1911 when there was nothing but the Moana Hotel and Diamond Head in Waikiki. Before the guy went back to where he came from, him and the girl were on Oahu Railway, apparently a train service that was on the island then?? I watched in the background and saw the Waianae Mt's a little before where Schofield and Wahiawa would later be but then there was ocean behind them which didn't really add up unless they cut the scene to when they were almost to their destination of Haleiwa. Then later on when he "got back", they showed the same dilapidated railway car sitting on what was left of the train track and I am not aware of ever having seen anything having to do with trains on Oahu.

Since the girl was trying to believe that he really had come from the future, she asked him if all the beauty they were seeing at this freshwater pond they went to swim in would still be there and knowing it wouldn't, he replied "I hope so".

Mostly the story was about the surfing history and Duke Kahanamoku tho but it also made me think of this thread and wondering if eventually they will not be happy until every square inch of the beautiful Oahu is covered with cars and blacktops and ways to get from one place to another.

[Ron Whitfield]

Mostly the story was about the surfing history and Duke Kahanamoku tho but it also made me think of this thread and wondering if eventually they will not be happy until every square inch of the beautiful Oahu is covered with cars and blacktops and ways to get from one place to another.

That quote could have been from 50+ years ago, and no doubt was often said.

[memorylane]

I snapped a photo in 04 of an area that I found amazing at how the homes had been built nearly all the way up the hill. Returned home and found pretty much the same shot in a collection of pics my grandma had left behind that was taken when she visited Oahu in the early 70's if not on one of her two trips there while we had our 79-82 tour.

[Ron Whitfield]

Just watching 5-0 depicts the insane buildup and losses. I love cruising thru ebay for all the vintage Hawaii photos and seeing what was. Hawaii sure had it.

[memorylane]

Same here and I am not even from there originally or living there now, just massively spoiled to it's beauty for 3 years when a younger gal (preteen).
I actually imagined that we would be living in grass huts, running around barefoot and no school when my dad got the orders for his tour of duty to Schofield Barracks in 79. Boy, was I wrong! LOL

I think that if people were concerned about numerous fares to get where they were going, they would have to liken it to how New Yorkers don't all own cars and so their bus and cab fare is the same dif and tags, license, gas and inspections.
Or Hawaii could always do what Boston did and go for the Big Dig arrangment. Not.

[Menehune Man]

Council hearing on rail propaganda July 11, 2012 calling out HART for its fleecing the public:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIhgVq0KWcs

Why do we still need to have 9.5 entities plus every construction contract agreement include millions of dollars a year to sway folks about the benefits of rail? Asked by City Councilman Tom Berg.

Watch and listen to the whole video.
You'll be pleased and or surprised by the ending!

[Ron Whitfield]

gee, don't tell me there's something rotten in Den...olulu!

[memorylane]

Makes you want to pray for speed in global warming, and wish for an O'ahu major tsunami.
Nah. Wouldn't work, or at least wouldn't be enough.

Maybe Iran can nuke us? Or S. Korea?

Sheez, I hope not! I wanna move there and zip all around on my motorcycle uninhibited by the rail or no, the Bus or no, another H1 or no...

Maybe that Ellison dude could just kick in the money for all these "good" ideas, he has enough to buy a damn island. Jus sayin.

[Menehune Man]

Although some want RAIL for the short term (minimal) jobs, most folks truly don't want OUR wallets raided for it! Most won't use it but gotta pay exorbitant taxes for it .
Stop this now D'mit!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdWR8...feature=b-vrec

Vote Cayetano folks or we'll be, and our children will be sorry.

[Kaonohi]

I watched a movie I rented from Netflix called The Ride and most of it was meant to be set in 1911 when there was nothing but the Moana Hotel and Diamond Head in Waikiki. Before the guy went back to where he came from, him and the girl were on Oahu Railway, apparently a train service that was on the island then??

Years ago there was a functional narrow gauge railway on O`ahu. If you drive out to the Ko`olina resort, or to the public access lagoons there (fine West coast swimming, BTW), you will drive across the extant railroad tracks (and get to see some fine black swans, BTW).
From what I understand, many of the steel tracks have been torn up, in fact my neighbor has some RR tracks in his yard, as part of a structure.

I don't really oppose some sort of railway for Oahu, but Mufi Hannaman's "Steel on steel," 'my way or the highway' approach really turned me off (and a lot of us, because steel-on-steel is noisy, dirty, and polluting). With so many other options, like mag-lev, especially. Quieter, faster, easier on the environment.

And now Mufi wants us to elect him into a more powerful position? So he can impose more of his will on us?

[memorylane]

Just watching 5-0 depicts the insane buildup and losses. I love cruising thru ebay for all the vintage Hawaii photos and seeing what was. Hawaii sure had it.

Still does IMO. Sure, just my own neighborhood, there are dirty, ugly areas but it's so much easier to overlook there than here.

[Ron Whitfield]

Still does IMO.

There's still good points about Hawaii, especially when looking from afar, but it's not like it was pre-'80, it's now a generic version with nice weather and topography.

[mel]

I'm Not For Rail by macprohawaii, on Flickr

Yes, I'm opposed to rail. Here are some updates since the last post (Aug 7):

City halts rail construction in wake of court ruling

Honolulu Rail Construction Stopped, Now What?

Hawaii Rail Construction Grinds to a Halt...

Honolulu Rail Project on Trial (video)

Carlisle's Fall: Incumbent Is 'Skunked' By Cayetano

[Kaonohi]

Clickedy clack - clickedy clack, the wheels go rollin' on the railroad track; well if you go you can't come back.... If you go you can't come back.... If you Gooooooooo, you can't come back.....

[Menehune Man]

Great post Mel. Good job on all that research.
I found another report. This one from Pacific Business News.
"The City and County of Honolulu has stopped construction on its $5.16 billion elevated-rail mass-transit project following last week's Hawaii Supreme Court ruling against the project..." http://www.bizjournals.com/pacific/n...?ana=e_lulu_bn

[Ron Whitfield]

They'll be filling in the holes and trenches from now on.
Good grief, the computer visions of what this monstrosity would look like cutting thru Honolulu is nothing better than complete visual blight. What a horror story, finally being undone. Redo the bus system, and get in new mgt.