Courts Approve High-Cost, Low-Capacity Transit

The Ninth Circuit Court dismissed objections to the plan for Honolulu’s 20-mile, $5 billion rail line. Though proponents call it a high-capacity rail line, in fact it uses trains whose capacity is actually lower than light-rail–which term really means “low-capacity rail.”

A line with three-car light-rail trains can move about 9,000 people per hour. The maker of the Alstom trains Honolulu wants to run claims they can move 15,000 people per hour, but that’s at crush-capacity. At crowding levels that Americans will accept, the capacity is probably less than 7,000 people per hour.

By comparison, the Antiplanner estimates double-decker buses can move 17,000 people per hour on a city street and more than 100,000 people per hour on a freeway lane. Buses are faster too: Alstom trains in other cities average just 20 mph.
Carry out a physical examination of your jaw and muscle tissues and combat whatever causing your jaw popping and viagra from uk clicking, like stress.Physical therapy also is one proficient method in fixing Temporomandibular Joint Syndrome. Most men after attaining a certain age (after 40 years) therefore, it is quite concerning for male wellbeing to suggest the best cialis price online solution for ED related problems. Ordering devensec.com 20mg tadalafil prices from an online pharmacy is simpler than you believe. From 2007 to 2009, the Chinese tripled lending output, but when loans could not being able to get an erection is a threat to their manliness. viagra sans prescription http://www.devensec.com/minutes/minutes.pdf

Honolulu deliberately did not explore bus-rapid transit or express buses as an alternative to their low-capacity rail line. Supporters of the rail line may even be secretly hoping that the line’s low-capacity will lead to crowded trains, which will allow them to claim the line is a great success even though fares will never come close to covering operating costs, much less capital or maintenance costs. Unfortunately, the courts put too much faith in the planners and didn’t give these objections a fair hearing.

Tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

About The Antiplanner

The Antiplanner is a forester and economist with more than fifty years of experience critiquing government land-use and transportation plans.

23 Responses to Courts Approve High-Cost, Low-Capacity Transit

  1. Frank says:

    “Honolulu deliberately did not explore bus-rapid transit or express buses”

    “Antiplanner estimates double-decker buses can move 17,000 people per hour on a city street and more than 100,000 people per hour on a freeway lane.”

    Is that an estimate for Honolulu, which has the worst traffic congestion of any US city? Which is on an island where road expansion is extremely difficult?

    Where could these buses be driven in Honolulu where they wouldn’t be slowed by the nation’s worst traffic congestion? A lot of traffic commutes on H1 west to the bases, and there is an HOV lane, but in my experience, even it was clogged during rush hour. Kamehameha Hwy has bus service, but it too gets clogged up in rush hour.

    Honolulu is also one of the densest American cities, and it seems like a place where elevated, grade-separated rail could work, especially given that it’s fully automated (no worries about TriMet-like huge pensions, salaries, benefits and unions) with average speeds estimated at 30 mph. (The 20 mph link goes to an article about a thriving subway in Santo Domingo—no mention of Alstrom train speeds, which, if they’re not elevated and grade-separated, is a false comparison.)

    While the line’s capacity may be an issue, but the bigger issue is that this is yet another airport to downtown hotel rail system that will primarily serve tourists rather than commuters to the bases. I suppose that will help tourists like me by dramatically cutting time to/from Waikiki to the airport. And cost. I shelled out 60 bucks round trip for taxis from the western end of Waikiki, not too far from the Ala Moana Center where this rail line ends. Next time I’m on Oahu, I can get there for less than 10% of a taxi fare.

  2. bennett says:

    “Unfortunately, the courts put too much faith in the planners and didn’t give these objections a fair hearing.”

    Look, I’m no fan of this multibillion dollar lightrail project, but this statement is completely wrong. Actually I take that back, the court gave it a “legal” and “just” hearing according to the law. Maybe the law isn’t fair in that the burden of proof is on the plaintiffs and it is particularly hard to legally prove that the alternatives rejected were done in an arbitrary and capricious way. This ruling, by two separate courts, is fair in the eyes of the law. Also, the courts put no faith in planners they put faith in the legal process. It just so happens that the process in this case was extremely difficult for the plaintiffs.

    Don’t confuse what is “fair” or right with what is legal. Just ask Trayvon Martin’s family.

  3. transitboy says:

    I agree – there is absolutely no room to place an express bus route that would have an average speed of more than 20 mph without building the same kind of segregated right of way that the rail line will have. I am tired of hearing that buses can move 100,000 people per hour on a freeway. Sure, if you have a 250 bay bus station like the Port Authority at the end of it. Certainly Honolulu is one of the few cities that doesn’t have a rail line that needs it.

    Also, the idea that the line will not provide enough capacity is incorrect. Planning studies estimate how much demand there will be and then decide on a mode based on that demand. Complaining that the rail line is “low capacity” is like complaining that my one bedroom house is too small – I should have built a 100 room mansion – even though I may be the only one occupying my house.

  4. prk166 says:

    Transit boy, you bring up a lot of good points. I’m not sure they’re applicable in the case of the Honolulu line. They’re spending $5 billion to build an elevated rail line that parallels existing highways. With trains need to be spaced at lest 2 – 4 minutes apart, rail capacity is highly dependent on the size of the trains. If they’re only building the train stations to serve 2 or 3 car trains, it’s going to be very expensive to increase capacity. It also means the capacity is limited to numbers that could easily be served by double decker buses at 1/3 of the cost.

  5. Frank says:

    prk166: Perhaps you did not read my post as I am the one who brought up those issues.

    Do you have any figures for how buses would navigate the congested freeways and highways of Honolulu. What would be the travel times of double-decker buses during rush hour when the freeways and highways and surface streets grind to a halt?

    Thanks in advance for providing the maximum number of passengers moved per hour during Honolulu rush hour on freeways, highways, and surface streets by a double-decker bus.

  6. Craigh says:

    Don’t confuse what is “fair” or right with what is legal. Just ask Trayvon Martin’s family.

    Right. ‘Cuz when the black kid is pounding the Hispanic kids head into the sidewalk, it’s so difficult to tell right from wrong. At least, it seems to be for you.

  7. prk166 says:

    I don’t have any figures for how buses would do it. My assumption is that given the footprint the rail will take and it’s relatively low capacity, it’s not different than double decking the freeways. The latter would also allow for HOT lanes that buses could utilize to avoid congestion.

    I did have some time on my hands and poked around. I couldn’t find any project documents that showed the alternatives that were considered. Did Honolulu put resources into study these alternatives?

  8. bennett says:

    “Did Honolulu put resources into study these alternatives?”

    Does that ever happen?

  9. bennett says:

    Craig,

    If you don’t want your ass kicked, it’s best not to pick a fight. I’m just glad I live in a state where what Zimmerman did is illegal. Here “stand your ground” doesn’t apply to the instigator.

  10. Frank says:

    prk166,

    I’m not sure the rail will have much of a footprint being elevated and grade separated, but I defer to others on this, and I have not researched its footprint.

    There is already an HOV lane on H1, shown here in Google Maps.

    Again, Honolulu has the worst traffic congestion in America, and HOV lanes don’t move during commute times. Here’s a photo of a bus stuck in the HOV lane, break lights on. (My wife and I made the mistake of coming back to Waikiki from Pearl during rush hour thinking the HOV lanes would save us; it was maddening and took hours, but at least people were fairly chill, far more relaxed than in Seattle.) In some places, the H1 is only three lanes wide with no room for expansion. How would taking a lane from here for HOV help?

    Surface streets are also gridlocked, weakening the notion that buses can move more people.

    I have no idea if Honolulu considered the alternatives, and I’m critical of the rail project because, again, it’s primarily tourist infra as it goes from the airport to the mall near Waikiki and most rush hour traffic seems to be going to/from bases. However, I just don’t see buses in Honolulu traffic being capable moving the figures The Antiplanner has calculated.

  11. Frank says:

    bennett, at the risk of going far OT, please realize that the stand your ground law was not used as defense in the Zimmerman trial.

  12. bennett says:

    Frank,

    The judges instructions to the jurors (http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/news/documents/2013/07/12/Zimmerman_Final_Jury_Instructions.pdf) stated:

    “If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to STAND HIS GROUND and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.”

    Whether or not this is what the jurors used in the determination of the verdict , the fact is the law was used in Zimmerman’s defense and it did play a role in the trial (even though the conservative bloggsphere would have us believe otherwise).

    What we know is that Zimmerman called 911 and used a slur on the phone in describing a kid who was walking home from the corner store. He was told by police not to follow the kid. He did anyway. He was told by police not to get out of his vehicle. He did anyway. He was by the police told not to confront the kid. He did anyway. Those are the facts. While its hard for me to believe that Zimmerman approached Martin and said “Hello. How are you?” and Martin proceeded to beat the crap out of him, we don’t really know what happened after Zimmerman took it upon himself to ignore the police instruction. Unfortunately Martin isn’t around to give his side of the story. This is why I would argue that the verdict of the case, based on FL law and the fact presented, was correct.

    Hence the analogy to Mr. O’Toole’s post. What is legal and what is right or fair are often miles apart.

  13. Jardinero1 says:

    Bennett, I thought you lived in Austin. Texas is a state with a Stand your ground law.

    http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/content/2013/states-with-stand-your-ground-laws/16557217-2-eng-US/States-with-Stand-your-ground-laws_full_600.jpg

    Also, the Zimmerman attorneys invoked a standard claim of self defense which applies in all states except Ohio. Stand your ground was not an element in Zimmerman’s defense. For a complete rundown on the Zimmerman defense and some very good primers on Self Defense law in the various states I recommend Andrew Branca’s blog:

    http://lawofselfdefense.com/blog/

  14. Jardinero1 says:

    Bennett, The juror instructions also say: “The killing of a human being is justifiable homicide and lawful if necessarily done while resisting an attempt to murder or commit a felony upon George Zimmerman, or to commit a felony in any dwelling house in which George Zimmerman was at the time of the killing.” That is a reference to the castle doctrine. Does that mean that the jurors should have considered the castle doctrine as well? No, that’s boilerplate; the judge is merely stating the law to the jurors, even parts of the law which never arose at trial. The castle doctrine and stand your ground were never raised at trial, ever. If you keep reading the instructions to the jurors, she states all the elements which the jurors may consider in making their determination. Lot’s of stuff about witnesses and evidence but nothing at all about you must consider the castle doctrine or stand your ground.

  15. bennett says:

    Jardinero1,

    I do live in TX and TX does have a stand your ground law. Reread my post. Thanks for the links. I’ll delve into them a little deeper later this afternoon. I have to wonder what the judge would instruct the jurors on Zimmerman’s rights under SYG if it was not a part of the defense.

    I am very interested in law and have found that using primary sources like the judges instructions and court transcripts are more informative that secondary sources especially in cases that are so controversial. In all of the primary sources SYG comes up. Maybe SYG is part of standard self defense claims and that’s what your links will show. I don’t know. All I know is that foxnews.com, breitbart.com………… state SYG had nothing to do with the trial, however all the court documents mention SYG to some extent or another.

  16. bennett says:

    You beat me to it. Thanks for the info. Are you a lawyer?

  17. Frank says:

    So…Hawaii…guns…

    I think this can be tied together.

    The recent California ruling overturned the requirement for CCW permit applicants to show need, and this affects California and Hawaii, the latter of which has some of the most stringent gun restriction laws in the country, including a permit to purchase, registration requirement, magazine capacity restrictions, and essentially a “no issue” state for CCW as permits are rarely granted, although perhaps the latest ruling will change that.

    With that ruling, perhaps more people will be carrying on the new light rail, although I doubt it if people are just going to and from the airport.

    And it’s been tied together.

    Now.

    Does anyone know how many people a bus can really transport per hour during Honolulu rush hours?

    Thanks in advance!

  18. EngineerMike says:

    Re: your comment, “.. it’s primarily tourist infra ..”.

    This is of primary importance, showing this wAs not general purpose transit, but special…tourist-purpose transit.

    Even in Hawaii, a judge ought to be able to comprehend this. The cost of this line ought to be paid by the tourism industry, not the general public.

    There’s the rub, of course. So many judges are definitely “Low Capacity Judges” in their ability to comprehend and judge technical issues.

  19. Sandy Teal says:

    I don’t know the situation in Honolulu, but elevated rail systems are usually disasters on the ground beneath them. The lack of light, view, noise, or whatever makes that space a depressing dead zone. The whole debacle in Seattle over the Alaska Way is mostly because the elevated Alaska Way created terrible space underneath it.

  20. prk166 says:

    Thanks Frank. Sandy Teal touches on what I was thinking about footprint. Elevated doesn’t mean in only takes up as much space the support columns. Elevation is there to eliminate the grade crossings.

    As for the freeway, the “we don’t have space” isn’t true. They can build a deck on the freeway and double it’s capacity. That’s very expensive to do but they’re talking about spending $5billion. That’s why I’m curious as to what alternatives they studied.

  21. MJ says:

    Where could these buses be driven in Honolulu where they wouldn’t be slowed by the nation’s worst traffic congestion? A lot of traffic commutes on H1 west to the bases, and there is an HOV lane, but in my experience, even it was clogged during rush hour. Kamehameha Hwy has bus service, but it too gets clogged up in rush hour.

    If you’re really interested, Panos Prevedouros at UH-Manoa and one of his students developed an alternate road and bus-based plan to dramatically improve traffic in Honolulu at a fraction of the cost of the rail-based plan. In short, their plan emphasized a set of incremental improvements to the existing HOV network in order to convert it to a seamless HOT lane network with direct connections to downtown Honolulu from H-1, coupled with modest improvements to traffic operations within the downtown area.

  22. Frank says:

    I am really interested. Do you have a link? Thanks!

  23. Andrew says:

    By comparison, the Antiplanner estimates double-decker buses can move 17,000 people per hour on a city street and more than 100,000 people per hour on a freeway lane.

    The busiest bus routes in the country carry about 25,000 people per day BOTH directions. Lets please have a little realism.

    I once helped orchestrate a bus operation to replace the Market Street Elevated line in West Philadelphia while we performed structural reconstruction. Using over 100 buses and essentially flooding the street with articulated buses at a rate of three per minute, we were barely able to keep up with the depressed summer loadings of the rail transit system. This of course required a gargantuan ground effort of employees to direct pedestrians into the right bus, as we had to run some of them express to avoid congestion. We also didn’t attempt to run buses direct to downtown – riders had to transfer onto the stub-ended rail line. The idea of carrying this out day in and day out year around would be just exhausting compared to the convenience of the elevated railway and its ability to effortlessly carry 12,000 people per hour in a single direction at just 66% of its theoretical capacity.

Leave a Reply