To get things rolling, we’ll lead off with this question, sent earlier
From Ni:
All right, my question for Mufi is whether he thinks the light rail will be worth doing if we only do the mini version, instead of the full version extending from Kapolei to UH Manoa. (Personally, I think it's go big or go home.)

Aloha Jeanne...thanks for the opportunity to communicate with your readers. To Ni, I would say I personally agree, but we really need to start somewhere...

From Joshua:
I like to ask Mayor Hannemann on the details of financing the rail, specifically the private side of paying for it.

Did we ever get any private corporations willing to invest in the rail to help offset the price tag? Also, please provide more info on how well the bus system will integrate with a rail. People are still seeing the two as separate entities, thus the opposition.

Please check the Alternatives Analysis for the details...Chanpter 5...The GET and FTA funds will pay for the 20-mile route. No private funding needed at this time. The 28-mile route will need greater assistance from D.C. and the private sector.

From Natty and Bill Prescott in Nanakuli:
Will there be adequate parking spaces at loading areas and will they be free? And has anyone taken a public survey to determine whether a sufficient number of people will use the planned transit system?

Not all stations will have parking or pull over spaces. Parking spaces that will be available will be free, or there may be a nominal charge. The survey that we did showed that half the Oahu respondents will ride rail. In fact, 64% of those ages 18-34 say they will ride.

What happened to the hybrid busses? I saw a new diesel the other day and was under the impression that all future busses are to be hybrids.

Mr. Mayor thank you for taking the time to answer questions, with that said, I'd like to ask you how long will the rail take to build? Do you foresee traffic getting worse during the building stages?

Please just build it already..If they had done this in 91... we would be riding...why does everything take so long?

To ptosis...Our most recent order of buses were all hybrid-electric. That will continue to be our goal.

As you know Mayor Hannemann, when doing construction in Hawaii, there is always cost overruns and delays. Will you need to increase taxes to pay for these change orders, or is there a contingency fund? Will we have to take from Peter to pay Paul? Will the Feds help us?

To Jay and Bob...
Our goal is to break ground in 2009. We hope to have the first segment completed by 2012. We believe it will take 5 more years beyond 2012 to complete 20 miles.
During the construction phase, there will be some inconvenience. The advantage of building from the west side of Oahu is that there will be less of a construction impact.
To Bob, It's important that history not repeat itself on the city council. The longer we delay, the more we're going to pay, and the longer we'll suffer.

Who is building the train system?

Is it going to be the Siemens with the overhead wires? (as it is in Portland.)

1. We all know that public transportation is a major terrorist target. How much of the projected cost is to be used toward protecting the one line from being targeted by terrorists?

1b. When the line goes down, from a terrorist strike, an electricity outage, or just an accident, what means will be used to shuttle stranded passengers?

To Rick, the estimated cost contains 25% contingency for change orders. We used the latest unit costs that counted last year's big cost increases on some material. I do not anticipate any tax increases to cover these possible change orders because of the contingency funds.
The feds will help us and participate with the contingency.

To ptosis...We have not yet selected the technology or the manufacturer. We will do this through an open and competitive process. We have ruled out overhead wires as a power source.

To jeff...In case of a power failure for whatever reason, battery power will bring the train to the nearest station.

"Starting somewhere" is just one way of hiding the true cost. Will all populations that need it be served? Student population? Tourist/Waikiki population? Central Oahu population? Will transit improvements to other areas of the island be ignored because there is no additional funding? Or should that cost be included in the true cost of what the rail transit option will cost?

First to Jeanne, it seems that I'm here and able to ask this myself, though it seems unlikely that I'll be able to stick around long enough for the answer.

Mr. Mayor, I have pair of question sets. I would have liked to be able to ask them separately, but time is not on my side now, so I'll ask them together.

1: During our summers, HECO already asks us to conserve power. Given the drain on the power grid that a rail system would produce, are our current power plants enough to power a it, or will we need to build another power plant? If the latter, what sort of power plant will be built, where will it be located, and how much would it cost?


2: Why, if rail is not already a foregone conclusion, is the revenue generated by the .5% GET increase applicable only to the rail option? Would it not have made more sense to have it available to whatever option was selected?

Here's another one, Mayor Hannemann

From BSug:
Mr. Mayor
If we do start on rail, what are your plans to get people to and from it; will we expand on our bus system to get people to the stations?

Do we need it, can we afford it, can we maintain it? Yes, but not the rail...
The train is being railroaded to us. The numbers don't match up and the sentiment is still out there that bus expansion and elevated roadways are just as viable. Why don't we hear about those options? Even with what's written below, cost is still a factor. It's odd that you don't even acknowledge the monetary burden the island of Oahu will bear with the tax increases. What happened to all the money the city gets from the property value increases? I didn't see the city working harder to increase the value of any homes? Really, explain that one.

Can you move government workers out to Kapolei? All that union support during the election should be able to get that through, right? (doubt it...) That would take many cars off the road "town-bound". I love when the government workers (city and state) take vacation and the "common people" have to go to work and pay for those vacationing. By the way, traffic is great too.

How do you get to work now? Have you ever tried public transportation on a regular basis? I'm not making a personal assessment on you Mayor, but many people rely, that is depend, on their car because the bus and the proposed train will not go where they need to go. Can I go grocery shopping after work on train? Or pick up the kids from the sitter? Or go to the second job late night to pay the high rents/mortgages needed to live in Hawaii? Or run errands during lunch break, usually only 1 hour? I understand some can/may do this with mass transit...but look at who is paying the bulk of the taxes - really - it's the people who don't have time flexibility to wait around for a train or a bus. The rail doesn't go where most people want to go. But you want us to pay more for one.

Who is going to lose out on their land? What is the cost of land acquisition and what is the process going to be? Do the people know that land will be taken away for rail? Can we afford the "market value" for the land?

Mr. Hanneman, regarding your determination to get rail, and only rail...I don't need it, I can't afford it, I can't maintain it. That's my viewpoint, I wish you would consider it. Thank you for your time.

To Jeff...Nothing is hidden. This process and the costs associated with rail have been open and public. The rail is designed to serve the corridor identified by the Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization(OMPO)where the population and employment are concentrated and therefore, the system is most needed. In designing the system, we are being very mindful of the possibility of future expansion and connecting to other areas. See the Alternatives Analysis for further details.

Comment from: Mufi [Member]
To Rick, the estimated cost contains 25% contingency for change orders.

To Honorable Mufi:
That estimate is from Parsons Brinckerhoff which has an infamous history of hiding true costs that is alarming enough to call into question every figure, fact and cost estimate ever given to the voters and elected officials. How can you defend the decision of already giving $11 million to such a company?

There is no better proof that a major infrastructure project like rail transit is unwanted, unnecessary and unaffordable than the fact that all that's going for it is "emotions", lies, and manipulations. Below I list examples of major lies and major manipulations.

The Mayor is already there, so we got the "emotional issue" part covered, which is what he calls this choice of transportation infrastructure.

In a recent opinion column in the Honolulu Advertiser my City DTS planner Toru Hamayasu, every paragraph was a lie. Multiple responses to this effect have been submitted and will, hopefully, be printed.

Here is an example of a major manipulation. The only major alternative to Rail is Managed Lanes. In the AA, two managed lanes schemes were examined:
(a) A two lane facility roughly from Waikele to Iwilei, with one lane per direction. The net benefit during peak hour is: One new lane.
(b) A two lane reversible facility from Waikele to Iwilei, but simultaneously the existing morning Zipper lane was deleted. The net benefit during peak hour is: One new lane.

Note that all high occupancy/toll (HOT) expressways in the nation are two to three lanes wide, and Tampa's reversible expressway is three lanes wide.

Well, despite this severe manipulation, a single new lane of expressway performed just slightly worse than a $4-7 billion dollar rail system. Imagine what a two or three lane facility would do and at a quarter of the cost of rail!

If only facts are used, then rail has no feet to stand on.

And one comment on cost:

Phoenix, Arizona with a population that is four times larger than Honolulu’s is developing a light rail system with a cost that is less than one quarter the cost of Honolulu’s proposed 28 mile heavy rail system.

If this was truly about easing traffic, then why don't you commit more time into creating a recycling program that takes us off the roads? The current HI-5 puts us on the road and contributes to traffic. The rail seems to be your number one issue, and yet it does not seem to apply to all your policies. Let's get more cars off the road. Or is it that, the more cars on the road, the more support you will find for the rail project? I don't see consistency in your approach.

Mr. Mayor,

You keep referring to the Alternatives Analysis. Would you mind highlighting those other alternatives? Could you provide an answer to why the rail is better than the other alternatives? Without the political speak please...

Thank you.

To James...
We have had ongoing dialogue with HECO from the outset of this process, and HECO says it can support the power needed for rail.
If I had my way, we would not be waiting for the AA study and the selection of the LPA by the city council. So rail is not a foregone conclusion.
And this is the first time the GET has been raised in more than 40 years. The legislature stated, and I agree, that this tax surcharge can be only used for a fixed guideway system on Oahu.

To BSug...600 buses will be used to support rail. That compares with today's fleet of 525 buses. More bus transit centers are being built to expedite express bus service, such as those in Kalihi, Mililani and Waianae. In the past year, we have broken ground for these three centers.

Thank you for your comment, Panos.

Mayor Hannemann, maybe I missed something. Do the citizen of Hawaii get to approve or disapprove the rail system by vote? Or is it up to only the city council? What I want to know is do we get to vote on whether we want the system?

And here's one sent earlier,

From Gerry H:
Dear Mr. Mayor:
Referencing your own golden words, "Do we need it? Can we afford it? And can we maintain it?"
I wonder if you can put these words in proper context with the plans for the new Rail System?
I believe that at least two out of the three questions will be answered with a resounding "No".
However, I would like you to comment on your own words.
Big mahalo, for your response

To simple...
No Build is an alternative, but not an acceptable one.
TSM, or expanding our bus fleet is another, but will not be effective and cost more than rail to operate because of higher labor and operational costs.
Managed Lane or toll roads are neither family-friendly nor environmentally friendly. Working families will find it difficult to pay the daily tolls during rush hour along with higher gasoline prices.
Therefore, fixed guideway is the best alternative...the most cost-effective and environmentally sound means of moving large numbers of people in an integrated multi-modal system.

MH: "this is the first time the GET has been raised in more than 40 years."


It is unfair to tax necessities such as drugs and prosthetics and food. Hawai'i is only state with a GET.

The tax is effectively a 16 - 18% sales tax on consumer goods becuase it's repeatable throughout every level of production.

Texas has the highest sales tax at less than 8.

To Frank...People are speaking through their elected officials.
The governor, the majority of both houses of the state legislature, our entire congressional delegation, 7 of 9 councilmembers and yours truly have ALL come out in support of a rail system for Oahu. In this recent election, 9 of 10 candidates for the 2nd Congressional District in the primary, both republican and democrats, when surveyed, stated they were pro-rail. Both Senator Akaka and Congressman Case reaffirmed their support of rail in their election. So it's clear, that the individuals who have been elected to office by the people are representing the majority view.

The point of HOT facilities is not “to take the public for a ride” and become a cash cow for government or a private operator. But HOT lanes can definitely pay for a good part of their construction cost and all of their operational costs. Any rail system in the U.S. pays only a small fraction of the operational cost and none of the construction cost. In other words, all taxpayers are taken for a ride.

Two points about HOT lanes should be made clear:

HOT lanes are primarily an express high-occupancy-vehicle and public transit carrieageway with the ability to zip buses along (i.e., buses can travel 10 miles in roughly 10 minutes). Buses and vanpools use the facility free of charge at all times.

The emphasis of HOT is not on T=toll. However, the toll enables the government or other project owner to sell unused space to low occupancy vehicles. Tolls can generate a substantial cash flow to pay for the facility. Also variable tolls enable the management of the facility to control the number of low occupancy vehicles on it to prevent traffic congestion.

For a three lane facility like Tampa’s, over 4,000 low occupancy vehicles per hour can use the facility along with city buses, tour buses and vanpools. Over 5,000 vehicles per hour will vacate the H-1 freeway prior to its merge with the H-2 freeway.

Census data reveal that Honolulu the second lowest drive-alone rate in the country and the highest carpooling rate. To succeed, Oahu’s future infrastructure choices must understand why these travel choices occur and how to foster them.

In addition to high cost, Honolulu’s proposed rail transit system does not fit its people’s commuting patterns, transportation needs, chosen lifestyle and the state’s plans for alternative energy sources. At the same time a reversible high occupancy/toll (HOT) expressway fits well. It is a proven solution for congestion relief, a reward for carpoolers, a great stimulator for bus usage, a tool for multi-work and activity multitasking residents and visitors, and it supports a market for locally produced alternative fuels.

To Gerry H...We can't afford not to have it. And the longer we delay, the more we're going to pay, and the traffic congestion will only grow worse and worse.
Remember September 5th, "Black Tuesday"...
when automobile traffic could not move on our freeways. The negative impact that day was felt throughout Oahu.

From Scott in Kaimuki:
I am fine with building the rail. However, I am not fine with the $120 million yearly maintenance fee that will cost the taxpayers. In order to cut down on maintenance costs for the rail, I suggest we build convenience stores at each station such as a 7-11 or snack shops. This way, the rent that these stores will pay will significantly cut down on maintenance costs for operating the rail system.

Mufi,

How come are roads are in such poor condition? When are you going to start fixing them?

If we can't fix the roads, how can we afford to build a train?

Thanks Mufi for being on the "Seat of Heat!

It took guts.

Mahalo nui loa!
Happy Thanksgiving!

Mr. Mayor,

Do you use mass transit now?

Mayor Mufi...

What are your plans when you are no longer in office?

Mr. Mayor,
What specifically do you not like about the Tampa reversible toll system? Given that it would be so much cheaper and faster to build and maintain, it just seems like a superior option. Also, in a blackout caused by earthquakes, hurricanes, or a terrorist attack, the train would be useless, but the toll road could be used by emergency crews.

To Scott in Kaimuki...
That's an excellent idea about having convenience stores in the train stations to generate revenue. It's all part of what I want to emphasize with transit oriented development. Operating and maintenace costs are NOT estimated to be $120 million. We estimate it to be $61 million in addition to the cost of operating the buses. Revenues from convenience stores can certainly offset that cost. That is not possible with a toll viaduct.

Mayor Hannemann, this one was sent earlier from Joel F.
Question 1) Why should everyone pay for something that only a small percentage of the state's population would use?

Honolulu Star Bulletin asked “of the main rail transit proposals, which do you prefer?” and only 43.5% chose Rail.

Pacific Business News asked “Should Honolulu go ahead with building a commuter rail system?” and only 45% chose yes for Rail.

And this from the Mayor’s survey: Of the 905 people polled, again only 45% support rail, and only 33% of current bus riders support rail.

Reading the Mayor’s comments above, it is clear the he is faithful to the rail transit doctrine.

However, the public has spoken loud and clear. Hopefully at least five Honolulu Council Members will be wise enough to save Honolulu from its transportation “saviors.”

Mayor Mufi, I was wondering if other problems that deal with traffic are also being looked at, such as the increasing creation of housing in the Ewa/Kapolei area. Isn't too much traffic caused by too many people? Wouldn't you agree that we must attack this problem from as many angles as possible rather then just build a train and hope it is suffice for everyone?

Mayor Mufi: Been reading some letters lately from windward residents who say don't build rail, even though it supposed to help deal with growth and new housing in Ewa. Maybe these guys weren't around or forgot about the big battles we had to keep the country country and protect areas like Kahaluu, Waiahole and Heeia from becoming the second city. We fought the powerplant in Heeia, and Kahaluu was supposed to have as many homes as Hawaii Kai. Doesn't rail help keep most of the growth confined to Honolulu and Kapolei where it's now designated?

Mayor Mufi, I was wondering if other problems that deal with traffic are also being looked at, such as the increasing creation of housing in the Ewa/Kapolei area. Isn't too much traffic caused by too many people? Wouldn't you agree that we must attack this problem from as many angles as possible rather then just build a train and hope it is suffice for everyone?

To Taxpayer...Toll roads will not be affordable for working class families who will have to pay as much as $8 each way during peak-hour traffic on top of higher gasoline prices. Environmentally speaking, toll roads will be a visual blight compared to a rail line and do nothing to eliminate harmful auto emissions. The thought of 20,000 cars emptying into downtown Honolulu with nowhere to go does not make sense because the congestion will only move and make things even worse. And finally, it's not true to say that toll roads pay for themselves. The Tampa reversible lane is not being paid for from its toll revenues. It's the old toll road under the viaduct is subsidizing it. In fact, Tampa mayor, Pam Iorio is now promoting a light rail option for her city.

We’re about out of time. I’d like to thank you all for taking part in The Hot Seat. And a big mahalo to Mayor Mufi Hannemann, who most definitely proved he can take the heat. Excellent job Mayor Hannemann!

Join us again next Monday from noon to 1 pm. with our next featured guest, Kuilima Resort Company CEO Nicola Jones — in The Hot Seat. She’ll discuss the development proposal for Turtle Bay on the North Shore. Check this space for updates. Aloha!

Thank you Jeanne and everyone who participated. I enjoyed this. And I want to wish everyone a safe, joyous and Happy Thanksgiving..
A hui hou..

Mr. Mayor, Will this 4.6 billion Rail pricetag factor in the extra inflation rate costs by the year of it planned completion in 2022? Will rail truly help those on the North, East, and South shore? And why is the public note allowed MORE public input or a VOTE Statewide on if we DO or DO NOT WANT RAIL? Can we VOTE as a STATE on the t

The Tampa rail proposal is

(1) A red herring.

(2) It goes like from Hawaii Kai to town, instead of the subject corridor which is Kapolei to town. Appleas and oranges.

HOT tolls are typically $1 to $3.

Mayor Hannemann--so by your answer the citizens of Hawaii will not get to vote to approve or disapprove the system. As you commented there were 2 city councilmen that did not go with the rest. One is from Hawaii-Kai district,yes? No one came to my area and asked if we wanted the rail system. The answer to my previous question only needed a YES or NO answer. tku

Mufi,
Why are you so fixated on rail?
Why did you go back on your word on Waimanalo Gulch?
Why did you give Waianae only a few million in your "community benefits" package?
Do you really think giving the people of Leeward Oahu more parks makes up for your going back on your word?
When do you expect your cabinet makeup to more accurately reflect Hawaii's demographics?
How are relations at the hale since you tried to reorganize the council?

I posted a question at 12:14 pm today and its not on the board...I do not see it or a response..then I REposted the question at 13:07 and now its over? wow!

This was great, thank you Jeanne and Mufi. Maybe the next one could run a little longer so more questions could be answered. Great job, looking forward to the next Hot Seat.

Aloha Mr. Mayor,

Sorry I missed you. Hopefully you get this and it is printed in the Advertiser's Sunday Focus Section, because it is important to note.

Whatever happened to your great idea of having the flow of traffic "reversed" by concentrating efforts on a "second city" in Kapolei?

You promised in your mayoral campaign that, and I quote, "Our Second City was envisioned as a place where people could live and work. So far, only the former has been realized. Tools to stimulate job growth are already in place. For example, as a City Councilman, I spearheaded a major revision of the city's General Plan to support economic development with the appropriate infrastructure in place. In leading by example, a Hannemann cabinet will work at Kapolei Hale once a week.
Reversing the traffic flow by having more jobs in West Oahu will achieve the
objective of ensuring a quality of life where residents can actually live,
work and play in Kapolei."
I love this idea, and so would the island's labor unions, businesses and even
the residents who live in the west side.
It's a great idea - who wants to drive to town, anyways?

What are YOU and your administration doing to ensure that HECO does not use fossil fuels in providing power to run the rail system which I support, by the way. However, I do have strong concerns about ruining the viewplanes both on this and other alternatives with poles and tracks sticking up in the air.

We cannot continue to push the use of the internal combustion engine as the primary way of moving people here there and everywhere.

ALoha Mayor. You had my vote & hopefully this isn't over - but i want to know if i am going to be able to take my bicycle on the rail. otherwise, how am i going to be able to get around once i get "there"?
Mahalo.
jz

Mayor Hanneman,

Since an elevated, reversible toll way would cost at least one billion dollars less than rail to build and maintain, you could have a fleet of busses taking passengers to and from town for free. That would surely increase ridership and reduce traffic more than a costly trainride. How much would the train fare be anyway?

Mr. Mayor,

You did an extremely awesome job of ducking out of all the tough questions (like from Panos) and handling all the softball ones.

Mr. Mayor, I'm aware that this conversation has long since ended, but I really can't see how HECO could possibly supply enough power to keep the rail system running with our current system. The Oahu's population will grow, which will drain more power; more homes will be built, draining more power; businesses will grow, draining even more power; and then we'd need enough electricity to power the rail system on top of all of that. Where will we get all that power, when, even now, HECO sometimes asks us to conserve power because we're draining their reserves?

Looking forward to our session on Monday

For the benefit of accuracy, I called Tampa to find some more about their "rail plans."

What the Tampa Mayor is talking about is support for an old idea to resurrect two CSX (freight) railroad lines in the Tampa area. She wants this idea to be included in Tampa's transportation plan for the next 30 years.

I think Mufi did an excellent job of answering the questions. I have a better understanding of the project, and he answered some tough ones. All these naysayers should take a hike. It's time to put Hawaii first. I live in Kailua and won't see a direct benefit, per se. But I see this is needed, for the overall benefit of the community. We need this and Mufi is right: The longer we delay the more we're gonna pay. So thank you Mr. Mayor.

I hope the Advertiser prints ALL of the questions asked, not just the pro rail ones the mayor chose to answer. So people can see, like the public polls, that the majority of people who participated in this forum do not support rail either. Why is the mayor so afraid to acknowledge the majority of taxpayers who don't support rail and to see the other viable options that would help solve our traffic problems?

Dear Mayor:

One figure that has never come out is how many people are presently commuting in from the area that will be serviced by the proposed Rail Transit project to the downtown area. How many by car? how many by bus?

Also, how many people are projected to be commuting that same route in 2012 (estimated completion of first phase)? in 2017 (estimated completion of full project)? and 2030?

These are all the critical dates that the project planners have been discussing but I have not seen any concrete numbers of potential commuters for those relevant dates ever mentioned. I am sure the planners have those estimated numbers of commuters. Could you please share them with us? Mahalo.

Aloha,
Randy

There's a problem with this non-scientific way to measure what seens to be a major lack of support for mass transit using fixed rail technologies.

Let's say that 90% of the submitted comments are anti-rail. Do those figures represent 90% of the overall population? People over 18? Registered voters? Car owners? Licensed drivers? Current bus riders? People who never use the bus?

Or does the figure represent 90% of the people in a much smaller group of people who oppose it adamantly for a variety of other reasons such as economic self-interest - taxi compamie, automobile dealers, etc., who have reached out to a larger constituency by playing on that second group's fears and concerns.

Rather than basing an important decision such as this on shakey stats such as the number of people who know how to write a blog, we should pay more attention to other factors in making the decision which, in my opinion, should have been made back in 1992.

These factors include but are not limited to appropriate lands available for future developmenat, population growth, fossil fuels availability, scoping where people want to go - not where they should be forced to go - and how quickly, efficiently, effectively, and economically they can move or be moved from one place to another.

Next, the cost of the additional tax can be looked at in many different ways, but on $40,000 of GET-eligible expenditures a year, that amount will be $200 or less than $4 a week. That's about a gallon and a half of gas at Costco or two cups of coffee from Starbucks or two or three chicken musubi from your favorite take out place or - my favorite - 4 malassadas from Agnes' Bakery.

NOTE: I did not support the current Mayor in any of his runs for office nor do I think that he has done a particularily good job in his first two years of office, but I do have to give him credit for pushing hard on this issue.

We need it and we can afford it - we can't not afford it - and, as for maintaining it, that will be up to the quality of the leaders we elect in 2012 and beyond.

As someone who attends an awful lot of public hearings on both sides of Punchbowl Street as part of my job, I am often, but not always, disappointed at how so few regular citizens show up to speak.

That's why the now-largely discredited Vision Team Process was so successful during its first three years in operation. It did get communities involved and people speaking own from late 1998 through the early part of 2002. Unfortunately, it became so identified with Jeremy Harris that it could not survive any more than he could.

My point in raising this issue is to move past this part of the process and start planning for how the maintenance & upkeep of the mass transit system will be handled rather than waiting for The Government to do it for us.

This isn't even a comment for the Mayor anymore because the session is long over. But this is more for those who keep touting the tollway and using Tampa as some silver bullet example. Why do you guys never present the Tampa tollway in Oahu's setting? If you did, the actual cost of a tollway on Oahu isn't that far off from the AA's estimated cost. Here are a few items for people to think about.

1) Tampa tollway is 9 miles, so you need to adjust it to at least 3x, at 27 miles to compare to the 28 mile rail. So figure the construction cost, tolls, etc. would go up.

2) Tampa tollway was built over an existing expressway that happened to have a nice 46' wide grassy median. Makes the construction and land acquisition issue easy. Do we have any space like that along any point of the H1? That's probably why the AA study only looked at a 2 lane tollway, instead of 3. We don't have that kind of space on the H1 median. And if you decide to build this tollway outside of the H1, you need land acquisition.

3) Tampa tollway did not raise taxes but the city raised bonds for it. That still means the taxpayer owes money, just not right away. So it's a lot of smoke and mirrors folks. We could easily say let's raise bonds to build the rail, therefore no GET tax increase, would that make it acceptable then for folks that are freaking out over the tax?

4) A tollway works well when there are few onramps and offramps to expedite the flow of traffic. Tampa tollway serves downtown and community of Brandon. Are we suggesting a tollway on Oahu only serve two endpoints? What about all the communities in between? And if you add more onramps and offramps to service more communities, it's ability to expedite traffic slow diminishes. Then what's the point?

5) At the end of the day, if you look at other costs aside from the $$$, how does a tollway discourage future growth of cars? How does a tollway promote an alternative to the car? How does a tollway discourage environmental pollution?

It be nice for someone like Panos to answer this. I've written roughly the same letter to Charles Djou, since he felt so strongly about the Tampa tollway, he went out there himself. Yet he's apparently chosen to ignore me. At least when I write to the Mayor, he actually did reply back.

Comments from Joshua {see above}

Excellent comments but don't expect Prevedourous, Slater or Djou to answer your questions because in my opinion the elevated HOT proposal, as they define it for Oahu, is more of a diversionary tactic than an actual viable solution to the elevated rail proposal.

Besides your points add that the population of Tampa within the city limits is 326,519 (from Wikipedia.org) while the population on the island of Oahu is about 900,000. Also the topography of Tampa is as flat as a pancake and allows the city and surface streets to be evenly spread out to minimize choke points while Oahu is made up of two mountain ranges where Honolulu's haphazard road development had to be shoe horned into the few slivers of areas between ocean and the mountain not already taken up by housing and other developments.
--------------------------

I don't think Hanneman's current rail plan as it stands now is viable, both in cost and route. The idea that the rail will substitute a bus route in the "densest" areas of Honolulu makes no sense since if that is what he wants, why spend many billions of dollars for an elevated rail system when a fleet of City Buses traveling in coned or "signed" bus only lanes on Honolulu surface streets can do the exact same thing ?

If the elevated rail is not built there still is another viable option that will merge both the elevated rail and HOT concepts. Why not make the current zipper lane as a part of a HOT lane for City buses ONLY? This exclusive bus only lane that starts in Kapolei and use the current zipper lane that starts before Kapolei and terminates in Nimitz Hwy can theoretically be extended all the way to UH through coned off or "signed" surface streets such as Dillingham, Nimitz, Ala Moana, S King, etc.

This will definitely screw up people in town driving their personal cars but isn't that the point to get people out of their cars and utilize a "mass transit system" for their work/school commute without costing all of the taxpayers billions and billions of extra dollars? One way to make this more equitable for the "casual driver" is to create these exclusive bus only lanes only during weekday rush hour traffic times of 5:30am to 9am and from 3:30 to 6:30 pm (or so).

If you want to discourage the future use of cars all you need to do is raise the fuel tax to help pay for a transit project--that'll get plenty of people using the bus and van pools quickly and lessen the traffic on the roads.

The people who are a part of the problem (people in cars contributing to
traffic) should be the ones who foot the bill for a solution.
Citizens already using bicycles, buses, and their feet to get
around, who are already part of the traffic solution, shouldn't be
held responsible to pay to fix other's problems through an increase in the GET.

This blog has been great and all questions are important. Here are my answers:

1) Tampa tollway is 9 miles, so you need to adjust it to at least 3x, at 27 miles to compare to the 28 mile rail. So figure the construction cost, tolls, etc. would go up.

The City’s Alternatives Analysis report that the Mayor commissioned for $10 million dollars describes the HOT expressway as the Managed Lanes alternative. It is 14 miles long, roughly from Waikele to Iwilei. All our commentary has been directed to this Oahu specification that the Mayor’s team chose.

2) Tampa tollway was built over an existing expressway that happened to have a nice 46' wide grassy median.

The feasibility and cost estimate are supported by civil engineer Linda Figg, president of Figg Bridge Engineering and the company’s chief bridge engineer Denney Pate, P.E. after both took a field tour of the proposed HOT expressway alignment on Oahu in mid-October 2006. The additional significance of these experts is that they designed Tampa’s reversible expressway. Simply put, they can do it in what we have available. Even that the Mayor’s AA report clearly says that the Managed Lane alternative has a much much lower requirement for land acquisition and other property modifications than rail.

3) Tampa tollway did not raise taxes but the city raised bonds for it.

Bonds are like a mortgage. You eventually pay it off and the home is yours and fully paid for. Tolls can help pay a good part or all the bonds, depending on the amount of motorists who choose to use the facility. Rail will recover only 27% of the operating cost and NONE of the fixed cost from the farebox. There is a HUGE difference in the bottom line between them.

Can't post the rest... I'm getting "comment invalid" although all is "plain text"

Please consider these points.

The AA’s recommendation for rail transit is unsupportable using basic logic:

There is no urban area in the US with even twice Honolulu’s population that has a heavy (rapid) rail system, as proposed in the AA.

There is no urban area in the US except for two old cities which developed along rail lines (New York City and Chicago) where rail transit serves more than 10% of urban trips.

The national average of rail usage in the 50 largest metropolitan areas in the U.S was 2% in 2000.

Even if Honolulu’s proposed heavy rail attains a fantastic 10% share of the trips, then for every 10,000 new trips generated in the Ewa plains, 1,000 will be by rail and 9,000 by other modes. Traffic congestion will be terrible, or the planned development will not occur, or people will relocate. The economy will suffer.

Compared to fast growing cities like Atlanta, Las Vegas and Phoenix, Honolulu’s population growth is tiny—under 4%.

Phoenix, Arizona with a population that is four times larger than Honolulu’s is developing a light rail system with a cost that is less than one quarter the cost of Honolulu’s proposed 28 mile heavy rail system. The LPA’s recommendation is entirely out of proportion.

Honolulu has by far the second lowest rate of solo-occupant vehicle use –it is close to NY City’s—and among the highest bus use in the U.S. Rail transit does not foster these good habits of carpooling and bus usage. It competes with them.

Despite a strong pro-rail campaign of false promises and outright lies as well as a strong pro-rail bias by most of the media, three separate polls show that, at best, only 45% of the poll respondents support rail transit.

from Prevedorous
"The City’s Alternatives Analysis report that the Mayor commissioned for $10 million dollars describes the HOT expressway as the Managed Lanes alternative. It is 14 miles long, roughly from Waikele to Iwilei. All our commentary has been directed to this Oahu specification that the Mayor’s team chose."

This is almost exact route of the current zipper lane and therefore the elevated HOT will not improve travel times to the users of the current zipper lane. If that is the case why build elevated HOT
-------------

from Prevedorous
"...much much lower requirement for land acquisition and other property modifications than rail."

That is assuming the elevated rail goes down Dillingham and replicates a bus route with many stops. If the elevated rail on stops and key points in a hub and spoke concept, the land aquisition and property modification would be much less than an elevated HOT
------------------

from Prevodouros:
"Honolulu has by far the second lowest rate of solo-occupant vehicle use –it is close to NY City’s—and among the highest bus use in the U.S. Rail transit does not foster these good habits of carpooling and bus usage. It competes with them."

Not sure where you got your info but here another FACT that is just as relevnt:

http://starbulletin.com/2000/06/20/news/kokualine.html

"..year 1999, the total number of vehicles (passenger vehicles, trucks, motorcycles and trailers) registered was 929,474. Broken down by counties, the figures were: Honolulu, 609,395; Big Island, 131,562; Kauai, 60,313; and Maui, 128,204."

With a general population of 900,000 on Oahu, doing some basic proportions, there is a car/bus/van associated for every 2 out of 3 people living on Oahu. That in itself is the MAIN reason we are seeing gridlock traffic and the elevated HOT does nothing to address this.
-----------

I am not trying to get on your case but BOTH sides of this debate are seriously deviating from unbiased "basic logic" and a "real world" application SPECIFICALLY applied to Oahu and NOT what works in Tampa, Portland, Denver, etc.

Dear WX,

the US has reached vehicle saturation for over 10 years now. This means that there are more vehicles than licensed drivers. Many people buy more than one car for lifestyle or necessity reasons. Minivan for transporting the kids, PU for work and beach ,and maybe a sports car or old restorable car as a project. We sure aren't Jay Lenos but no matter how many vehicles we own, the bottom line is that we can only drive one at a time. The rest remain parked at home.

The growth in traffic in most stable areas has stopped. For example, the travel time during jammed conditions between UH/University on ramp and Pali Hwy off-ramp has been a constant 9 to 11 minutes in the absence or rain or accident, since the early 1990s.

Growing areas, of course, have growing pains. The stupidity of Hawaii policies is that they are pro-growth but they don't build lanes for it.

Honolulu is the most lane defficient city in the United States. It has 1.5 lanes per 10,000 population. Second from bottom is San Juan, Puerto Rico with 2.2. All other cities have 3 and above.

Dear WX,

the US has reached vehicle saturation for over 10 years now. This means that there are more vehicles than licensed drivers. Many people buy more than one car for lifestyle or necessity reasons. Minivan for transporting the kids, PU for work and beach ,and maybe a sports car or old restorable car as a project. We sure aren't Jay Lenos but no matter how many vehicles we own, the bottom line is that we can only drive one at a time. The rest remain parked at home.

The growth in traffic in most stable areas has stopped. For example, the travel time during jammed conditions between UH/University on ramp and Pali Hwy off-ramp has been a constant 9 to 11 minutes in the absence or rain or accident, since the early 1990s.

Growing areas, of course, have growing pains. The stupidity of Hawaii policies is that they are pro-growth but they don't build lanes for it.

Honolulu is the most lane defficient city in the United States. It has 1.5 lanes per 10,000 population. Second from bottom is San Juan, Puerto Rico with 2.2. All other cities have 3 and above.

Dear Panos,

Thank you for replying. However, I would like to know if you have any counterpoints to my 4) and 5). And since you've deemed the AA's version of the tollway inadequate, what do you propose as the ideal tollway? Length? Course? What communities will it serve? It may be possible to build the tollway over the H1, but I cannot believe there will be no impact to the existing emergency medians on the H1. I have a feeling a tollway built over the H1 will eliminate the emergency medians with the 6 foot wide columns at best and actually eliminating two current H1 lanes, one of each direction, at worst. And if you remove lanes, what positive benefit will the tollway provide?

You provide a lot of stats comparing with other US cities but stats are just a starting point. You need to look at some real world situations. Due to the geography of Oahu, we have certain bottlenecks not just because of population size or overall land area size, but the sheer fact that the mountain ranges and the occupation of land by the military forces the public to transit through narrow corridors. We need to stop building infrastructure that is pro-car. People are greedy and selfish by nature, I've yet to hear the zipper lane being used to full capacity so you know there are many people who don't want to carpool. We need something that has nothing to do with the car. I know with your stats that even if we get a fantastic 10% on rail, that still means a lot of cars in gridlock. But the way I see it is, if that gridlock becomes too unbearable, that individual will hop over to the rail and you may even get higher than 10%. A lot of car lovers switched to the Metrolink in LA this past summer because the high gas prices finally became unbearable to them.

I agree the finance of the rail looks shaky right now and I do think the powers that be need to work harder at resolving the finance. The gov't can build homes and commercial space around stations to receive further income to offset the rail. I see the rail as more than just a solution to traffic gridlock, it can become a key urban planning tool. A tollway only promotes sprawl.

Yay Joshua!!! Great points made, and toll roads suck! I agree that when traffic and fuel costs become "unbearable," people will switch to rail. Also, your comments on our geography and narrow corridors is right on!

Shannon - thanks for pointing out that the naysayers are clogging the blog and skewing the pro versus con "numbers." I bet there are a lot of people like myself, pro-rail, who didn't know about the blog/comments online. Just stumbled upon it tonight.

Although I didn't vote for Mufi, in my opinion, it took guts to do this blogging hot seat!

Like Rie said,"I agree that when traffic and fuel costs become "unbearable," people will switch to rail."--let's speed up that process and pay for rail or any other transit project through a fuel tax increase. That'll get people used to using public transportation, secure funding for rail (or any other project) and clear the roads of cars, now. Gas is so cheap in the U.S. compared to other countries.

And as Joshua said, "I agree the finance of the rail looks shaky right now and I do think the powers that be need to work harder at resolving the finance"--I don't think people are thrilled about the cost of rail and funding it through a GET increase, even pro rail people.

Please see here: http://www.hawaiireporter.com/

Joshua - are you an urban planner? Rail stations can indeed become commercial hubs!

"The gov't can build homes and commercial space around stations to receive further income to offset the rail. I see the rail as more than just a solution to traffic gridlock, it can become a key urban planning tool."


Also from Joshua : "A tollway only promotes sprawl."

Here, here!!! I think many of us forget we live on a SMALL ISLAND, and catering to the auto makers and oil peddlers is no solution to our traffic problems.

As for being inconvenienced during the construction of the rail system, no matter which traffic solution is chosen, there will be cost and inconvenience.

Again, toll roads suck!

Hello Rie,

No, I am not an urban planner. I'm just lucky enough to have traveled to many parts of the US and other countries as well. So I've actually been able to use tollways and railways and speak from experience. Tollways will only work as long as people are willing to pay. When I travel to areas with tollways, I rather choose to sit in traffic or take alternate routes to avoid paying tolls. It's called shun-piking and I don't see why that won't happen if one is built on Oahu either. The 91 tollway in Southern California charges as much as $8.50 during peak hours to use the tollway. No way am I gonna pay $8.50 one way just so I can drive my car which I have to pay for myself, plus the car insurance, plus the gas. A tollway looks like a cheap infrastructure solution because it hides a lot of the cost with the car owner. With a rail/bus combo, all I have to pay is the fare and be able to walk on my own two feet.

As for railways, I've seen bad examples and I've seen good ones. I got the idea of gov't building homes and commercial space around rail stations from Hong Kong's rail, the MTR. It actually not only makes money to cover construction and operation, it turns a tidy profit annually. They build huge condos over rail stations in addition to a lot of retail space. I think if our gov't spent more to build condos with little parking space over rail stations, they would solve two problems. If they made these condos affordable, it alleviates the affordable housing issue. And because it's right over a rail station, you are basically building a large pool of potential transit riders, further insuring the success of the rail. Retail space around the station will also rake in more income AND provide stores catering to the rider. Most anti-rail folks object because they argue they can't conveniently perform chores like grocery shopping, hitting the P.O., etc on a rail. But what if these stores are right at the stations?

I've also rode on rails that have bike racks so people can also bring their bikes with no problems.

Mr. Mayor; You just don't get it do you? The majority of taxpayers are against your pet project, yet you insist it has to be done. I think it was a lack of a toy train for you that causes you to push for your idea to become a reality at a horrible expense to the people. Wait until the feds approve a loan and then get you EIS out for the people to decide. In fact I think this matter should be left to he taxpayers of Oahu to vote yes or no. Plain and simple, yes!

All we need is a 5-mile fly-over of an extension of H1 into Honolulu. Traffic congestion is the result of 7 lanes of cars from H1 and Moanalua into 3 lanes of cars at Lunalilo.

wyclkn seoup dbkf ejouiyfv dcxzutp yskn gzcpiqnb

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting!

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting! Look for some my links:

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting! Look for some my links:

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting! Look for some my links:

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting! Look for some my links:

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting! Look for some my links:

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting! Look for some my links:

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting! Look for some my links:

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting! Look for some my links:

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting! Look for some my links: