.

Yes, two a day is good but it didn't happen as often as it could have. I didn't want to add the inability of one of the superintendents to maintain that schedule. I don't want get into why. The preparation of the area and and pre drilling, grouting, etc also took many days that we didn't drill the shafts. And yes on top of all the items you mentioned above. I didn't want to get into too much detail. I didn't realize that you are familiar with the project.

So I have a question for you. If the half % GET tax hike is insufficient to pay the over runs and exhorbatant additional costs of this project within a reasonable time frame, then what is to stop them from keeping the GET hike AND raise our property taxes on top of that? And once that property tax hike is in place it will never go back down again. Yeah, I hate the rail.

I doubt the pensions would be enough to scratch at the overruns. However, I do believe that all the bribes and under the table cash they take might pay it off the first year. 

Yeah keeping the 1/2% and jacking up the property tax.............worst case situation is going to happen.

Regarding pay it off, won't happen but I want those lying sacks of crap to pay for their bullcrap.  The worst thing I come across is when people don't even try to come up with a good lie.

Do you think most people will really have 3 legs in their commute? I suspect most would be served by 2 legs, one way. UH Manoa might be the exception though.

My commute in Japan involved at least a 5 minute walk between the subway I took and the train I took. I had a 10 minute walk to the subway to start and then probably a mile walk from my final train to the university. Sometimes I did catch a bus to catch a train as well. I understand your skepticism but I got used to it and it worked somehow.

You're kidding me right? 

The facts of rail are this.  The users of rail will live within about 1/2 mile of the stations.  The users of rails will have their destination within about 1/2 of a mile from a rail station.  Does this sound familiar.............maybe your exact scenario?............




I repeat one of the reasons for the buildup along Kakaako is because you need density for this type of rail to work and the density needs to be around the rail line or this doesn't work.

When you look at rapid transit options there is a reason why they work in New York, or in Japan and it's because of how their cities & transportation models are set up.  For what the politicians are trying to sell us on Oahu it does not work as it is and does not work for you unless you work in town or Ala Moana AND you live in close proximity to the rail line.

Couple of interesting stories in Civil Beat:

http://www.civilbeat.com/2016/04/grabauskas-honolulu-rail-audit-a-mess/

http://www.civilbeat.com/2016/04/what-to-do-with-the-tax-sinkhole-that-is-honolulu-rail/

 

Why do you assume it is laziness?

As with everyone, our opinions are based upon personal experience.

Do you have children?

No need to answer, I only raise this question because a parent of three children, managing drop-offs/pick-ups and extracurricular activities may have quite a different opinion and perspective from that of a single, male college student, or even from that of a married couple who have no children.

Yes, 2 small ones, and I have traveled with them multiple times on the train. I am not going to claim the train is as convenient as a car but it is manageable.

You're kidding me right? 

The facts of rail are this.  The users of rail will live within about 1/2 mile of the stations.  The users of rails will have their destination within about 1/2 of a mile from a rail station.  Does this sound familiar.............maybe your exact scenario?............

I repeat one of the reasons for the buildup along Kakaako is because you need density for this type of rail to work and the density needs to be around the rail line or this doesn't work.

When you look at rapid transit options there is a reason why they work in New York, or in Japan and it's because of how their cities & transportation models are set up.  For what the politicians are trying to sell us on Oahu it does not work as it is and does not work for you unless you work in town or Ala Moana AND you live in close proximity to the rail line.

I would expand it a little more than 1/2 mile, but that's just my experience.Again, if there is a convenient bus line that connects to a rail station is greatly expands the ridership. 

Yes, rapid transit benefits from population density but let me ask you this, is it better to build it ahead of time when it is easier or build it later when we are more dense and it would be harder to build?

And in the meantime there really aren't a lot of realistic proposals to deal with our traffic problems as it is.

.

You're kidding me right? 

The facts of rail are this.  The users of rail will live within about 1/2 mile of the stations.  The users of rails will have their destination within about 1/2 of a mile from a rail station.  Does this sound familiar.............maybe your exact scenario?............




I repeat one of the reasons for the buildup along Kakaako is because you need density for this type of rail to work and the density needs to be around the rail line or this doesn't work.

When you look at rapid transit options there is a reason why they work in New York, or in Japan and it's because of how their cities & transportation models are set up.  For what the politicians are trying to sell us on Oahu it does not work as it is and does not work for you unless you work in town or Ala Moana AND you live in close proximity to the rail line.

I agree.  I was still living in Seattle when they were planning their rail system.  They used places like Portland, San Fran, and Chicago as examples of where rail will work.  To me, it was a good fit for Seattle as the layout of the main points of connection was close to linear, or at least followed the I-5 corridor.  Same/similar with the other examples of where rail work.  It connected large pockets of metropolitan areas with places like the airport and other key areas.  When rail came up here, I thought that it "could" work if they planned it out properly.  That said, Oahu isn't layed out like places.  Can they redevelop the key areas to make it work?  Probably, but that will take time.  A LOT of time, and not to mention the cost. 

Japan's transit situation is unique IMO.  Their network of underground lines in the metro areas are amazing!  They are able to have construction of rail stations below existing building in densely populated areas.  I am not sure if those buildings were design with plans to accommodate transit stations in the future, but I don't think many of them were.  To see them doing construction below a tall office building is something I don't see happening here.  I'm a licensed structural engineer and to me that would be a nightmare!!!

I agree.  I was still living in Seattle when they were planning their rail system.  They used places like Portland, San Fran, and Chicago as examples of where rail will work.  To me, it was a good fit for Seattle as the layout of the main points of connection was close to linear, or at least followed the I-5 corridor.  Same/similar with the other examples of where rail work.  It connected large pockets of metropolitan areas with places like the airport and other key areas.  When rail came up here, I thought that it "could" work if they planned it out properly.  That said, Oahu isn't layed out like places.  Can they redevelop the key areas to make it work?  Probably, but that will take time.  A LOT of time, and not to mention the cost. 

Japan's transit situation is unique IMO.  Their network of underground lines in the metro areas are amazing!  They are able to have construction of rail stations below existing building in densely populated areas.  I am not sure if those buildings were design with plans to accommodate transit stations in the future, but I don't think many of them were.  To see them doing construction below a tall office building is something I don't see happening here.  I'm a licensed structural engineer and to me that would be a nightmare!!!

Japan has rail lines going everywhere which makes exclusive use of the subway system viable.

Secondly, city planning in Japan like most of Asia has mixed commercial and residential areas where everything you will ever need is within walking distance.  If you need lunch, you just go down the elevator and walk to the nearest 7/11 or hole-in-the-wall restaurant.   If you need a "load" for your phone, just go down to the phone repair store at the 1st floor of your building. 

In the US, city planning intentionally separates commercial areas from residential / suburban areas to encourage the purchase of cars (helps the industry) and make us dependent on the use of fuel (easy to tax and generate revenue for the government).  I cannot imagine going to a Costco or even a Safeway and bringing all those items through the bus-rail-bus system.

.

Japan has rail lines going everywhere which makes exclusive use of the subway system viable.

Secondly, city planning in Japan like most of Asia has mixed commercial and residential areas where everything you will ever need is within walking distance.  If you need lunch, you just go down the elevator and walk to the nearest 7/11 or hole-in-the-wall restaurant.   If you need a "load" for your phone, just go down to the phone repair store at the 1st floor of your building. 

In the US, city planning intentionally separates commercial areas from residential / suburban areas to encourage the purchase of cars (helps the industry) and make us dependent on the use of fuel (easy to tax and generate revenue for the government).  I cannot imagine going to a Costco or even a Safeway and bringing all those items through the bus-rail-bus system.

Yeah, I agree.  I was just commenting on how the system/superstructure of the rail/train/subway system itself evolves in such heavily populated areas. 

I dated a girl from Japan for a while and it amazed me that many people take close to 2 hours for commute each way!  Car ownership was very low where she lived (near Shibuya).  Yes, pretty much everything you needed was either available at the train station or very near by.  That way, on your way home, you stop and get this, or that.  We sort of had to plan everything out.  Buy this one day, buy that another day.  Limitation was what we (usually just me) could carry home. 

Yes.  Planning of communities in US is very much that way.  However, there are very much more involved to encourage alternate modes of transportation.  To make roads more bike friendly, allow better access to public transportation, etc.  However, all that is dependent on change in lifestyle habits.  When I lived in Seattle, we were offered free bus passes, which usually cost close to $150 per month.  I ended up taking that and I thought I would be hampered by having to work around the bus schedule, but it wasn't too bad once you got into the flow of things.  However, like mentioned above, it would be different if I had kids.  Nowadays, I need my car to go from meeting here to meeting there.  Back then, I didn't need my car much for work. 

The thing that bums me out is it's the tail wagging the dog.

They're using this rail monster as their excuse to super overdevelop all areas along the line.
(And make some developers rich)

Hoopili.
The Aiea drive in high rises where they approved a height limit variance from 60 ft. To 350 ft.
Kakaako where height limits were obliterated and nothing is affordable.

And it barely has any seats !

Cities I've been to with successful rails have multiple lines or systems. ( DC, New York, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Portland, Chicago )

I would expand it a little more than 1/2 mile, but that's just my experience.Again, if there is a convenient bus line that connects to a rail station is greatly expands the ridership. 

Yes, rapid transit benefits from population density but let me ask you this, is it better to build it ahead of time when it is easier or build it later when we are more dense and it would be harder to build?

And in the meantime there really aren't a lot of realistic proposals to deal with our traffic problems as it is.

By its very definition you need density for Rapid Transit to work.  Rapid Transit is basically a mass transit system (think The Bus), but with a dedicated roadway/railway/lanes/etc.  Because the route fixed it is not flexible. 

By comparison a mass transit system like The Bus is extremely flexible and for that reason is better able in our situation to adapt to what the ridership requirements are.



Regarding when things should be built...........no it's not good to build now as we are paying the bulk of the costs for this type of system.  Now this is just the construction costs, when you get into the actual costs to operate and maintain the system it's a horrendous idea.  The very same thing could have been done but using The Bus.  No expensive railway maintenance or support powerstations.  No needing special rail cars.  No needing dedicated & specialized labor to fix the system.   

Also if the width of the structure is widened a bit you could allow for toll usage.  The guys battling to get into town in the morning and getting home at night...........a lot of them would pay for that use.  Think too that the support power stations would not have to be built, run and maintained/repaired.  That dedicated specialized railcar maintenance yards would not be required.

I urge you to truly look at there being alternatives to what was shoved down our throats and realize the County has made mistake after mistake after mistake.

Chicago has an excellent transit system that is affordable. The same cannot be said about the Honolulu rail project. The route keeps getting shorter while costs keep going up. There is one thing that I am hearing very little about. The bus only pass that so many people now rely on will vanish and be replaced by a combined rail/bus pass. It will make no difference if you use the rail or not. Riders will just have to cough up and pay more. It is accepted that the combined pass will cost a lot more than the bus only pass.

I would expand it a little more than 1/2 mile, but that's just my experience.Again, if there is a convenient bus line that connects to a rail station is greatly expands the ridership. 

Yes, rapid transit benefits from population density but let me ask you this, is it better to build it ahead of time when it is easier or build it later when we are more dense and it would be harder to build?

And in the meantime there really aren't a lot of realistic proposals to deal with our traffic problems as it is.

I disagree.  Expansion of BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) lanes has been proposed and ignored.  This is really nothing more than minor lane expansion, repainting, and signage changes.  Very cheap to implement and able to be implemented across the entire island of Oahu if so desired.

The other item that would help is to offset on grade intersections (think slight underpass and slight overpass where both directions can move at the same time).  This would pay massive dividends during rush hour traffic by enabling traffic to flow.

Both of these are very cheap solutions.


Now will this solve traffic?  No it won't.  Every conference that I've been to where this issue comes up is like this; (A) steal space make more lanes, (B) traffic bottle necks eventually become worse because you have more lane miles still feeding the same choke point, (C) eventually pony up the money and increase the number of lanes.  This is true up in Portland near the Washington border at in New York at the Tappan Zee Bridge.

A lot of rail supporters say they would use the rail, but when asked if they use The Bus - they say no. So their propensity to use the rail is just as null.

I disagree.  Expansion of BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) lanes has been proposed and ignored.  This is really nothing more than minor lane expansion, repainting, and signage changes.  Very cheap to implement and able to be implemented across the entire island of Oahu if so desired.

The other item that would help is to offset on grade intersections (think slight underpass and slight overpass where both directions can move at the same time).  This would pay massive dividends during rush hour traffic by enabling traffic to flow.

Both of these are very cheap solutions.

Now will this solve traffic?  No it won't.  Every conference that I've been to where this issue comes up is like this; (A) steal space make more lanes, (B) traffic bottle necks eventually become worse because you have more lane miles still feeding the same choke point, (C) eventually pony up the money and increase the number of lanes.  This is true up in Portland near the Washington border at in New York at the Tappan Zee Bridge.

By its very definition you need density for Rapid Transit to work.  Rapid Transit is basically a mass transit system (think The Bus), but with a dedicated roadway/railway/lanes/etc.  Because the route fixed it is not flexible. 

By comparison a mass transit system like The Bus is extremely flexible and for that reason is better able in our situation to adapt to what the ridership requirements are.

Regarding when things should be built...........no it's not good to build now as we are paying the bulk of the costs for this type of system.  Now this is just the construction costs, when you get into the actual costs to operate and maintain the system it's a horrendous idea.  The very same thing could have been done but using The Bus.  No expensive railway maintenance or support powerstations.  No needing special rail cars.  No needing dedicated & specialized labor to fix the system.   

Also if the width of the structure is widened a bit you could allow for toll usage.  The guys battling to get into town in the morning and getting home at night...........a lot of them would pay for that use.  Think too that the support power stations would not have to be built, run and maintained/repaired.  That dedicated specialized railcar maintenance yards would not be required.

I urge you to truly look at there being alternatives to what was shoved down our throats and realize the County has made mistake after mistake after mistake.

Do you think the bus system expansion would make a big dent? If someone isn't going to go from bus to train to bus then they aren't going to go from bus to bus to bus either. The bus also has limitations, such as driver error and they still get screwed by traffic. Busses don't offer the speed that a rail system can, mainly because of traffic. Now I am not knocking the bus system, but I think its limitations mean it wont be able to fully address future traffic issues.  Both have their advantages and disadvantages and I don't think one could ever completely replace the other.

Ultimately, whether we build a rail or even triple the capability of the bus system, the public mindset has to change in order for them to become effective. Forcing a mindset change would be difficult but I think the ever increasing population means it will happen sooner or later if for no other reason than traffic is so bad or the cost of having a car is so expensive.

My issue when it comes to the rail is all the fishiness behind the curtains, not the actual idea of a train system itself. The ever expanding budget is inexcusable. Every time bones are found it seems to add millions to the cost of construction alone! Gotta wonder if the contracts were written poorly.

Rail was nothing but a huge money grab for a lot of people.  It's initial planning and long term viability was a sham.  It was merely to get the project going to make the people involved a lot of money and to ram down a poor design on the people of Oahu to where the project got to the point of no return. 

The planning was less than poor with no plan on how to maintain, supply power, supply workforce, supply security personnel.  HPD answer when rail committee said that the HPD would staff the trains, was that no one discussed anything with the HPD especially in regards to manpower and funding to make such a thing happen.  Again it was just to force the project before Fed monies disappeared and before the people of Hawaii could get wise to the financial fiasco that is rail. 

People in the construction field who make contributions got themselves richer along with key politicians.  None of this was a secret or an accidental oversight by Rail.  They understood all of this but kept it all hidden from the public on purpose.  People should go to jail over stuff like this.  Sad but you don't do major Fed, State or City construction projects without paying the correct people.  That is just how things work here, not unlike many places.  Don't be naive and think it is about helping the people of Oahu.   

Rail was nothing but a huge money grab for a lot of people.  It's initial planning and long term viability was a sham.  It was merely to get the project going to make the people involved a lot of money and to ram down a poor design on the people of Oahu to where the project got to the point of no return. 

The planning was less than poor with no plan on how to maintain, supply power, supply workforce, supply security personnel.  HPD answer when rail committee said that the HPD would staff the trains, was that no one discussed anything with the HPD especially in regards to manpower and funding to make such a thing happen.  Again it was just to force the project before Fed monies disappeared and before the people of Hawaii could get wise to the financial fiasco that is rail. 

People in the construction field who make contributions got themselves richer along with key politicians.  None of this was a secret or an accidental oversight by Rail.  They understood all of this but kept it all hidden from the public on purpose.  People should go to jail over stuff like this.  Sad but you don't do major Fed, State or City construction projects without paying the correct people.  That is just how things work here, not unlike many places.  Don't be naive and think it is about helping the people of Oahu.

That's what I was thinking. I'd like to be naive that with all the money these unions, politicians and others who TOOK from us to pay themselves - there would be some inkling of public good. But as the days pass one can only see that this was just straight up theft to the Nth degree. It's a shame that there are people starving, struggling to get by while these people continue to justify extending their tax. No different from gangs who take money from local businesses.

Cayetano must be laughing and saying to himself "I told you so" every time he reads a story about this stupid project.  He wanted to implement a greatly expanded bus system instead and that would have already been in operation by now.