Search Results for: honolulu rail

Light Rail Follies #5: An Objective Panel

By | | Transportation
4 Comments

The Honolulu city council wants to build a rail line. Yet many people in Honolulu think this would be a waste of money, and they are pushing for high-occupancy toll lanes, that can be used by autos and bus-rapid transit, instead. So, to cover its you-know-what, the city council plans to create an “objective panel” of five advisers who will review the alternatives and select the final plan.

Who will be on the panel? A list of people being considered includes a vice president of Bechtel, a former vice president of Siemens, a former Parsons Brinckerhoff planner, and numerous employees or former employees of various transit agencies, nearly all of which run some form of rail transit.

Continue reading →

Rail, Energy, & CO2: Part 2 — Results for 2005

By | | Transportation
7 Comments

Does rail transit save energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions? Based on the results for 2005, the answer seems to be mostly “no.” These results are found in two downloadable spreadsheets: the National Transit Database summary (1.4 MB) and a summary spreadsheet for rail cities. You can also download a spreadsheet with the calculations of BTUs and CO2. A brief explanation of the spreadsheets and a guide to abbreviations can be found at the end of this post.

Here is a summary of the results:

.   Mode            BTU/PM    CO2/PM
.   Guideway        10,573     2.05
.   Commuter Rail    2,766     0.50
.   Light rail       3,458     0.67
.   Heavy rail       2,692     0.52
.   Motor Bus        3,733     0.66
.   Trolley bus      4,004     0.77
.   All transit      3,276     0.60
.   Automobile*      3,445     0.54

* As noted in part 1, “automobile” is the average for passenger cars, not including light trucks (pickups and SUVs).

Continue reading →

San Jose Transit Insanity

By | | Transportation
Leave a comment

Someone recently asked me what I thought were the nation’s worst-managed transit projects. I suggested the Honolulu rail was number 1, the Maryland Purple Line was number 2, and BART to San Jose was number 3. But maybe I underestimated the insanity of the BART-to-San Jose line.

It’s even worse than Mr. Arnold suggests. In 2001, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) did its initial alternatives analysis comparing BART with a wide range of alternatives including buses, bus rapid transit, commuter rail, light rail, and “Diesel light rail,” which is what the FTA now calls “hybrid rail.” BART was picked because they thought it would get the most riders even though it was also by far the most expensive. Continue reading →

Concrete Columns Cracked

By | | Transportation
6 Comments

The first phase of the Honolulu rail transit system is supposed to open at the end of this year, with trains serving nine of the planned 21 stations. But those plans may be put on hold because contractors have discovered cracks in the concrete pillars holding up the elevated stations. Due to these cracks, the consultants have “advised that passengers not be allowed into the seven affected stations until further inspections are done.”

The Honolulu rail project was idiotically designed to be entirely elevated, creating problems both with scenic views and differential settling in swampy land.

That leaves just two stations that might open later this year. Most likely, none will open at all. What is known for sure is that the cracks are growing. Continue reading →

Transit Construction Costs Run Wild

By | | Transportation
5 Comments

America’s transit industry has been heavily criticized for spending so much on construction. Yet the industry continues to roll up cost overrun after cost overrun for projects that should have been too expensive to build in the first place.

VTA’s planned single-bore tunnel into downtown San Jose. Figure by VTA.

Take, for example, the BART line to San Jose, which is being planned and built by the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), which has never displayed much competence in the past. Rather than cut and cover two small tunnels into downtown San Jose, which is the usual practice, VTA wants to bore one gigantic tunnel three to four stories underground. The 6-mile line was originally projected to cost $4.1 billion, but last October the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) announced that it expected the cost to be $9.1 billion, or $1.5 billion a mile, and the agency expressed doubts that VTA had the funds to cover this cost overrun. Continue reading →

A New Level of Transit Incompetence

By | | Transportation
19 Comments

It seems like we are getting more lessons about massive cost overruns for transit projects every couple of weeks. Last week, the Federal Transit Administration issued a “scathing report claiming that the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) was being “overly optimistic” and “misleading” in its estimates of the costs of building a BART subway to San Jose.

Despite objections from critics, VTA decided to bore an 86-foot deep, 48-foot diameter tunnel rather than build two shallower and smaller tunnels using the cut-and-cover method, which would have been less expensive and saved passengers’ time.

The six-mile-long project was originally estimated to cost $5.6 billion (which is itself ridiculous) and be done in 2029, but the FTA now predicts it will cost as much as $9.1 billion and won’t be complete until 2034. This is $1.5 billion a mile for a transit line that is expected to carry so few riders that early estimates predicted it would cost more than $100 for each new transit rider carried. VTA’s response doesn’t refute anything the FTA said, but basically said it is too late to fix the problems so taxpayers would have to live with them (and pay for them). Continue reading →

Why U.S. Infrastructure Is So Expensive

By | | Policy brief, Transportation
4 Comments

Now that Congress has passed an infrastructure bill, major media outlets are beginning to ask questions about how the money will be spent. Using the Honolulu rail project as an example, the New York Times wants to know why so many infrastructure projects suffer from such large cost overruns. Bloomberg asks similar questions using Boston’s Green Line extension as an example.

Click image to download a four-page PDF of this policy brief.

The Eno Transportation Foundation and Manhattan Institute wonder why projects cost more than in other countries even before the cost overruns. These are all good questions that should have been asked before the bill was passed. Continue reading →

Cost Overruns and Ridership Shortfalls

By | | Policy brief, Transportation
2 Comments

Rail transit projects built in the United States typically suffer severe cost overruns and end up carrying far fewer riders than originally projected. The latest studies published by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) indicate that the projections made for some recent projects are better than those made in the past. However, this is partly because the FTA has changed its definition of “cost overrun” and partly because the FTA has not yet looked at some projects that we know have huge overruns, such as the Honolulu rail project.

Click image to download a five-page PDF of this policy brief.

The Department of Transportation first looked at this issue in a 1990 report by Don Pickrell, who looked at four heavy rail, four light rail, and two automated guideway (“people mover”) projects in nine cities. On average, Pickrell found, building these projects ended up costing 62 percent more than projected, operating them cost 130 percent more than projected, and ridership was 47 percent less than projected. Continue reading →

Reinventing Transit for a Post-COVID World

By | | Policy brief, Transportation
3 Comments

As society rebuilds after the pandemic, the transit industry at a crossroads. It could totally reinvent itself to truly serve the residents of modern cities. Alternatively, it could come up with new reasons for ever larger subsidies despite continuing to be ineffective and wasteful. Since President Biden and Democrats in Congress seem eager to give it subsidies with few to no questions asked, it is likely to choose the latter course.

Click image to download a five-page PDF of this policy brief.

Transit ridership has declined steadily since 2014, losing 7.7 percent nationally between 2014 and 2019. During that time, transit ridership declined in about 85 percent of the nation’s major urban areas. On a larger scale, it has been declining for the last century, with per capita ridership falling from nearly 290 trips per urban resident in 1920 to just 37 in 2019. As of April, 2021, ridership was 60 percent lower than it had been before the pandemic, and it isn’t clear that ridership will ever recover to 2019’s already low levels. Continue reading →

Quadruple the Cost Plus 11 Years of Delay

By | | Transportation, Urban areas
2 Comments

Today the Cato Institute is publishing a new report on high-speed rail. In consideration of the work that went into that report (which is partly based on past Antiplanner policy briefs), I am taking this week off of my usual Tuesday policy brief.

Honolulu buses could easily move the number of passengers likely to ride the train, for far less money. Photo by 123TheBusHonolulu6969.

Instead, behold the latest revelations about the Honolulu rail transit line, which is currently under construction. Originally projected to cost less than $3 billion, the Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transit (HART) now admits that it is expected to cost $11.3 billion, or “about $12 billion” when finance charges are included. This is after years of denying that the cost would rise above $10 billion. Continue reading →