We need more light rails

[HawkeyeNFO]

Conversely, (someone please correct me if I'm wrong) AMTRAK actually is profitable within the Northeast Corridor. It's quite reliable between Virginia and Boston, too. I've used it several times, and my daughter takes it frequently to get between her college in Roanoke and home in Northern Virginia.

 

[mpeirce]

Here in South Florida we have a new passenger rail service. The first leg opened was Miami to West Palm Beach ( about 70 miles) with 3 interim stops, and they just started a new leg to Orlando.

Florida’s Brightline rail is kind of interesting.

The geography of south east Florida is helpful - with north/south linear development between the ocean and the everglades.

It’s also some sort of public/private hybrid. I’m not really sure of the details, but the operating company is private and issues bonds, but they are subsidized tax free bonds. Or something like that.

This has been run much better than the California train efforts. What a mess that has been.

 

[Donno]

Maybe I missed it, but why don't you just fly?

 

[explanade]

Florida’s Brightline rail is kind of interesting.

The geography of south east Florida is helpful - with north/south linear development between the ocean and the everglades.

It’s also some sort of public/private hybrid. I’m not really sure of the details, but the operating company is private and issues bonds, but they are subsidized tax free bonds. Or something like that.

This has been run much better than the California train efforts. What a mess that has been.

Does the line run along the coast?

Is it going to be liable to flooding?

 

[skyking1]

I dreamed of the system long ago that had deep tunnels and a main line that moved big Maglev cargo platforms at 100 miles an hour or so. I did not want to go all crazy with aerodynamics.
It was all automated of course, and there was an acceleration and deceleration lane where needed.
There would also be large passenger units. It would all run on the same space and you would accelerate a load up to speed and it would just fit in.
The units will be large enough for a couple of side by side semi trucks. The drivers would drive on and either get off the truck or go with the load.
The 18x70 passenger units would have restrooms and vending machines, and reclining seats like an express bus.
I pictured a west coast line from Mexico to Canada, because that's where I live.
Where lines met it would have a huge station that would decelerate and send the platforms off in new directions.
I probably powered it with unobtanium.

 

[mpeirce]

Does the line run along the coast?

Yes, but not along the water. It’s inland a bit.

Of course the branch going to Orlando, then Tampa, obviously cut across the peninsula.

Is it going to be liable to flooding?

Nah. It’s not along the waterfront.

 

[Koolau]

I've told the story of the Honolulu Light Rail so many times, I won't repeat it. The thing will be about 20 miles long. But before it is complete, it will cost the US tax payers $1Billion. BUT it will cost every man woman and child on Oahu $10,000. And that's before they get the first rider. THEN when things break, it will cost even more to keep it running. I'm not a light rail fan if you haven't figured it out but YMMV.

 

[Andre1969]

I've told the story of the Honolulu Light Rail so many times, I won't repeat it. The thing will be about 20 miles long. But before it is complete, it will cost the US tax payers $1Billion. BUT it will cost every man woman and child on Oahu $10,000. And that's before they get the first rider. THEN when things break, it will cost even more to keep it running. I'm not a light rail fan if you haven't figured it out but YMMV.

Unless I'm doing the math wrong, you might have misplaced the comma. $1B divided by 995,638 (google) comes out to $1,004. Or are you factoring in additional costs?

I just did the math for the Maryland purple line, which looks like it's up to about $3.4B to complete. Divided by ~6.2M, comes to $548 per resident. That's not an insubstantial amount of money. Wikipedia estimates about 65,000 people will ride it daily. I saw another source that said they estimate it will take 17,000 cars off the road and save about 1M gallons of gasoline per year. So yeah, if each car averages around 59 gallons of fuel per year!

For comparison, I found stats for the Baltimore light rail that show an average of around 10,000 riders per day. It's about twice as long (30) miles as the proposed purple line (~16), and in my opinion, actually does something useful. It connects the suburbs to the city, so people can use it to commute, tourists can park out in the 'burbs and ride in, etc. In contrast, the Maryland purple line basically connects one Metro (what the DC area calls its subway) station to another, and meanders along the way, through already congested areas that are served by bus routes. I have a feeling their projections of 64,000 riders per day are optimistic. However, it does cut through the University of Maryland, so I could see a lot of students (on free/discounted passes no doubt) hopping on it to go short distances.

I tried to find stats on how much the Baltimore Light Rail cost to build, but the only thing I could find was an old Washington Post article from 1989, that mentioned delays and cost over-runs, and an estimate of $468M to build. It didn't open until 1992, so Lord knows how much it ultimately cost.

The Baltimore Light Rail also probably saved some money because a good portion of it uses the same right-of way as the old WB&A (Washington, Baltimore, & Annapolis) railroad. The Washington-Baltimore branch went defunct in 1935, and as a result much of it has been developed, turned into roads, and so on...even BWI Airport is built over it. But the branch that went from Baltimore to Annapolis (It split off from the DC-Balt branch in Linthicum) ran passenger trains until the 1950s I think, and freights until the late 1960s, so much of its right-of way was still intact.

I just remembered, the Baltimore Light Rail also has a spur that connects to BWI Airport. I'd think that would be pretty popular run. But, I guess most people hopping on a plane with their family and luggage in tow would rather drive/be driven right to the airport, rather than going to a light rail station and taking the train in. So, maybe no so convenient, after all.

 

[Koolau]

Unless I'm doing the math wrong, you might have misplaced the comma. $1B divided by 995,638 (google) comes out to $1,004. Or are you factoring in additional costs?

I just did the math for the Maryland purple line, which looks like it's up to about $3.4B to complete. Divided by ~6.2M, comes to $548 per resident. That's not an insubstantial amount of money. Wikipedia estimates about 65,000 people will ride it daily. I saw another source that said they estimate it will take 17,000 cars off the road and save about 1M gallons of gasoline per year. So yeah, if each car averages around 59 gallons of fuel per year!

For comparison, I found stats for the Baltimore light rail that show an average of around 10,000 riders per day. It's about twice as long (30) miles as the proposed purple line (~16), and in my opinion, actually does something useful. It connects the suburbs to the city, so people can use it to commute, tourists can park out in the 'burbs and ride in, etc. In contrast, the Maryland purple line basically connects one Metro (what the DC area calls its subway) station to another, and meanders along the way, through already congested areas that are served by bus routes. I have a feeling their projections of 64,000 riders per day are optimistic. However, it does cut through the University of Maryland, so I could see a lot of students (on free/discounted passes no doubt) hopping on it to go short distances.

I tried to find stats on how much the Baltimore Light Rail cost to build, but the only thing I could find was an old Washington Post article from 1989, that mentioned delays and cost over-runs, and an estimate of $468M to build. It didn't open until 1992, so Lord knows how much it ultimately cost.

The Baltimore Light Rail also probably saved some money because a good portion of it uses the same right-of way as the old WB&A (Washington, Baltimore, & Annapolis) railroad. The Washington-Baltimore branch went defunct in 1935, and as a result much of it has been developed, turned into roads, and so on...even BWI Airport is built over it. But the branch that went from Baltimore to Annapolis (It split off from the DC-Balt branch in Linthicum) ran passenger trains until the 1950s I think, and freights until the late 1960s, so much of its right-of way was still intact.

I just remembered, the Baltimore Light Rail also has a spur that connects to BWI Airport. I'd think that would be pretty popular run. But, I guess most people hopping on a plane with their family and luggage in tow would rather drive/be driven right to the airport, rather than going to a light rail station and taking the train in. So, maybe no so convenient, after all.

The "Billion" was just us sucking at the Federal trough. It was THE main reason that we pulled the trigger on the idea that had been floating around for 15 years. The Feds drug a billion dollars though Kapolei and people went for it. Ironically, the Feds keep telling HART that they haven't yet met their responsibilities to get the money! I'm sure we'll get it eventually, but it always makes me laugh (and not because it's funny.)

The finished project will be around 14 Billion which is 10K/man-woman-child in Oahu. And, unfortunately, it will be the proverbial train to nowhere. The original route goes all the way to Ala Moana center which is sort of THE BUS Terminal. That won't happen now until 2031. Currently, the idea is to dump people at Aloha Stadium where THE BUS will do the rest. So that's only 20 miles long.

When the original studies were done, it was admitted that the effect on traffic might be as much as just 6%! But those who earn their livings building the thing and those who become rich because of it really love the whole idea.

The fact that it's ugly as sin is routinely pointed out by tourists. Locals just sort of shrug because they have a cousin or uncle or in law or child who makes his/her living from the thing.

My opinion is that the building process over the past 10 years has already cost most people more time (traffic rerouting, slow downs, stops) than the system will save during its relatively short life-time. (We don't plan or fund maintenance here.)

But, I didn't really mean to rant again. Returning you now.

 

[Koolau]

While I'm ranting about "public w*rks" projects, I mentioned the Aloha Stadium in my above rant. The stadium was built in 1975 and rusted out and closed in 2020. So they want to build another stadium. Naturally, all the contractors and builders who built a stadium out of steel where the wind is full of salt are all out of business now. Gonna be the same with the rail, but I'm done ranting - for a while, so YMMV.

 

[Gumby]

What happened to Honolulu Stadium? I used to watch the Islanders play there.

 

[Koolau]

What happened to Honolulu Stadium? I used to watch the Islanders play there.

It was demolished in 1976 after the Aloha Stadium was opened. It's possible that Aloha Stadium was mis-identified as Honolulu Stadium due to Honolulu Stadium's long history.

Honolulu Stadium only held about half the spectators that Aloha Stadium held.

I think the main interim replacement for Aloha Stadium is the University of Hawaii Stadium. It's a nice facility, but it's quite small in comparison to Aloha.

Major events that used to be held in Aloha are all on hold. A new stadium is still being planned (IIRC, the budget is something like $400 million.) I'm guessing it will be made out of steel - with similar promises that it won't rust. (Fool me once...)

 

[Gumby]

It was demolished in 1976 after the Aloha Stadium was opened. It's possible that Aloha Stadium was mis-identified as Honolulu Stadium due to Honolulu Stadium's long history.

Honolulu Stadium only held about half the spectators that Aloha Stadium held.

...

It was back in the 60s when I lived there.

 

[explanade]

I don’t think the Pro Bowl is going back to Hawaii.

So what other events would fill a large stadium out there?

As for light rail, would it serve tourists? Tourists must add a lot to the traffic and parking problems. If it covers a lot of the most visited places, it might entice some tourists not to rent cars since prices are so high s8nce the pandemic.

 

[Koolau]

I don’t think the Pro Bowl is going back to Hawaii.

So what other events would fill a large stadium out there?

As for light rail, would it serve tourists? Tourists must add a lot to the traffic and parking problems. If it covers a lot of the most visited places, it might entice some tourists not to rent cars since prices are so high s8nce the pandemic.

Honestly, I don't keep up on the stadium's special events, but there used to be several per year.

As far as tourists, the route is currently from Kapolei to the Aloha Stadium at Halawa (and back, of course.) There is the Ko Olina resort in the Kapolei area. The resort competes with the Waikiki resort area. BUT, the light rail doesn't really connect to anything directly for anyone going TO or staying IN Ko Olina resort.

So there is no connection to the air port or major tourist and shopping areas of Oahu. Of course, connecting from the light rail to THE BUS is possible and I'm sure will have some advantages for those going to certain attractions. But one can also just get on THE BUS and do the same thing without the "drama" of getting to a light rail station.

$15 Billion dollars would have gone a long way toward improving current traffic issues. The primary pinch points ARE the Kapolei area and the University and Waikiki. Instead, they have built the ugliest overhead concrete structures to take the light rail a few miles from essentially (almost) nowhere to (definitely) nowhere. They then fill in with THE BUS.

I can not predict if there will even be riders on the Rail, but the rail cars are few. One of the sites below suggest 800 riders per train, but I guess we'll see. So even full ridership will make little difference IMHO. I hope I'm dead wrong as I'd love to see less cars on the H-1 which I have to use a lot.

From my end of the Island, there was never even talk of rail (thank goodness.) Again, I just can't describe the ugliness plastered across some of the most beautiful sky and mountain scenery caused by the light rail. I don't have to look at it on most of MY trips by car, but when I do see it I get a gut reaction of real disappointment that we sold our souls (so to speak) to make j*bs for folks to build something that (my guess) will be a boondoggle. Please, God, let me be wrong!

Here is a very optimistic view of the light rail as it opens on June 30 this month.

https://www.khon2.com/local-news/honolulu-rail-to-begin-operating-june-30/

I just hope it w*rks as well as it's been hyped. By the way, 1300 parking slots for drive and ride seems woefully short of projected need IF the light rail is to affect traffic. Realistically most people will live a couple of miles or more from the station. How do they get there? Drive and park. Kiss and ride? Walk? THE BUS?

Here's another view of the elevated rail system. I wonder how long it will be until local taggers turn all of the concrete into "works of art." Won't that be lovely to see instead of the green Ko'olau mountains and blue sky with puffy clouds in the back ground.

https://lookintohawaii.com/hawaii/6777/honolulu-rail-transit-information-oahu-hi

Like most people, I like to be proven right about my opinions. This is one time I hope I'm totally wrong and light rail improves traffic and peoples lives.

 

[zippy2020]

In view of the fact that across the US, many public transit agencies are still seeing lower ridership post-pandemic, I don't see how any new transit construction is justifiable, even in crowded urban areas.

My spouse worked for one of the multi-county transit agencies. At their peak they managed 30% of their working budget from ridership fares, almost double what any of the many municipal transit agencies in the region could manage. But right now? - his former employer is struggling with a 60% reduction in ridership.

One of the biggest problems has become crime. Not just on trains or platforms, but also in the parking lots and garages. Leaving your car somewhere has become too much of an alluring opportunity to "smash and grab" gangs, even in "nice" neighborhoods - in fact, it's worse there because criminals assume you've got more stuff they can steal.

 

[jollystomper]

One of the biggest problems has become crime. Not just on trains or platforms, but also in the parking lots and garages. Leaving your car somewhere has become too much of an alluring opportunity to "smash and grab" gangs, even in "nice" neighborhoods - in fact, it's worse there because criminals assume you've got more stuff they can steal.

The parking infrastructure aspect is a good point. In most places where light rail works, people get to them by surface public transportation or local metros, instead of driving to them. In the U.S. you have to build parking lots/garages to serve most of these stations as the density is just not there. So it is not just the light rail construction, but also the roads to get to the stations and the parking infrastructure needed at the stations.

 

[explanade]

Yeah they have to come up with a strategy to replace cars with these systems.

When there was the gas price spike in 2008, ridership spiked and sales of large SUVs cratered for awhile. That was when the Hummer brand died -- only to be resurrected as an EV.

During the start of the Ukrainian war, gas went over $5 in some places but not long enough to change behavior. Also I guess there was enough pandemic aid that lower-wage workers just kind of held on and gas prices went down fairly quickly.

But a permanent move of prices above say $6 could change behavior again.

 

[Andre1969]

Yeah they have to come up with a strategy to replace cars with these systems.

When there was the gas price spike in 2008, ridership spiked and sales of large SUVs cratered for awhile. That was when the Hummer brand died -- only to be resurrected as an EV.

During the start of the Ukrainian war, gas went over $5 in some places but not long enough to change behavior. Also I guess there was enough pandemic aid that lower-wage workers just kind of held on and gas prices went down fairly quickly.

But a permanent move of prices above say $6 could change behavior again.

Back in 2008, it was probably the Great Recession that came after the gas spike that killed demand for big vehicles, moreso than the fuel prices. While that $4+/gal gas was not fun while we were going through it, the spike didn't last long. I remember filling up on Christmas Day, 2008, at a Shell Station in Laurel MD and it was down to $1.499/gal. Of course, it didn't stay down there for long.

Historically in the US, buyers only flock to smaller cars where they're forced to, and it's usually economic turmoil that does it. For instance, it was the '57-58 recession and its that pretty much gave VW a good foothold in the US, kept Studebaker out of the grave. let Rambler become #3 in 1961, and put the compact car on the map. But, as the '60's wore on and the time were prosperous, cars got bigger again.

Then there was the '73-74 Arab oil embargo, followed by the one in '79. While fuel prices were a factor in those two, I think the "odd/even" days, fuel rationing, and fear of running out of gas were a bigger concern. And, the recessions themselves.

That '73-74 oil embargo gave us something else...increased government intervention. They forced the auto makers to get better fuel economy, and they did, by downsizing the cars, getting rid of their bigger engines, installing under-sized transmissions, etc. Of course, the auto maker, and the customer, found a loophole. Trucks were put to another standard, and also exempt from many other automotive requirements. As a result, buyers started flocking to trucks, and truck-based vehicles. And, today the three most popular vehicles in the United States are bigger and heavier than just about any mastodon-class full-sized car of the 70's. To their benefit though, they do get better fuel economy these days, and emissions are a fraction of what they were, especially if you compare against the older ones that ran on leaded fuel.

 

[indiajust]

Even sharing rail networks between cargo and passenger trains is cost prohibitive. Clearing the way of long heavy slow cargo trains to permit a fast small passenger train priority access imposes safety and scheduling costs on the cargo network.

It is rather like the packet switching optimization problem. A very small amount of high priority traffic can be tolerated on a network. Throughput rapidly degrades if you over prioritize. When everything becomes a rush order, nothing gets shipped.


The other side of the coin is perhaps less desirable. Imagine how many cabins and humans worth of rail traffic would be required to justify the immense expense of 1350 miles of rail. Do you really want all those people and houses jammed around your cabin?

Build it, and they will come. Your pastoral cabin might end up in the lobby of a casino as an historical exhibit.

 

[NW-Bound]

"We need more light rails".

Yes. And we need a lot of other things too.

The problem is how to pay for all these goodies.


PS. I think a lot of problems go away if people just stay home, watch TV and do not move about much.

Say someone who just flew across the country to take 19 nights of cruises to Europe, fly around Europe, then fly back home.

 

[Chuckanut]

Yeah they have to come up with a strategy to replace cars with these systems.

When there was the gas price spike in 2008, ridership spiked and sales of large SUVs cratered for awhile. That was when the Hummer brand died -- only to be resurrected as an EV.

During the start of the Ukrainian war, gas went over $5 in some places but not long enough to change behavior. Also I guess there was enough pandemic aid that lower-wage workers just kind of held on and gas prices went down fairly quickly.

But a permanent move of prices above say $6 could change behavior again.

Gas is approaching $5 a gallon in some states. It changed my behavior when it spiked to nearly $4 a gallon years ago. I bought a hybrid.

 

[OldShooter]

Yeah they have to come up with a strategy to replace cars with these systems. ...

Yes. If we can force the proles into less time-efficient means of travel, the roads will be clear for us.

 

[Koolau]

I'm sure some other cities have great bus transportation systems, but I've always been impressed with ours. It's called THE BUS and I've alluded to it often.

Oahu is laid out in a more or less circular living area around our mountains. So THE BUS is set up to not only connect close-in communities to the major w*rk areas, but it services the folks on the opposite side of the Island.

Rides are set up so that a person going more or less in one general direction can get on, pay the fare, get a transfer and get to any place on the Island for (IIRC) $3.

I think I have heard that the fare covers about half the cost of each rider (so subsidy is roughy half of each fare.) The idea is that subsidizing fares keeps cars off the crowded roads. It means that we don't have to add more lanes to crowded freeways. And for the most part, it seems to w*rk. Near to us is a Kiss and Ride, where neighborhood folks can be dropped at a bus pick up point to be whisked to their w*rk. It's very efficient, though it means you still need a car (and an extra driver)

I hate driving in rush hour, BUT, unless there is an accident, our rush hour is much more manageable than most I've driven in. So I think our system w*rks reasonably well.

Because we have such a good system, I've never seen the need for the Light Rail. There were a lot of news pieces more or less "leaked" to the public about how a Light Rail would help reduce rush hour congestion. Every piece always seemed to insert the fact that the Feds would help out too.

I recall an argument (to counter folks saying "just add more busses instead of light rail.") The argument went something like "Busses are big and there's no more room on the Freeway for more busses." I suppose that's a good argument if you assume no cars will be taken off the highways by adding more (and better) bus service. Why anyone thought a light rail would attract more ridership than more busses I do not know. Busses can go into neighborhoods and pick people up. Light rail is where ever it is and you have to get to it.

The one argument for light rail is that it does go faster than most busses (or cars) as it has its own unimpeded track (high over the rest of traffic.) Given the small size of Oahu (600 square miles), finding a route at ground level never made any sense, so the vastly more expensive overhead system was adopted.

I always said that we could have done the "overhead" thing and sent express busses on it more cheaply than using light rail, but what do I know. I'm sure the Feds wouldn't have given us a Billion dollars for that idea.

So, now we're gonna have a Light Rail. I hope I'm the one being embarrassed because I still think it will be a boondoggle. But I'm still betting the folks who touted it for years and years and poo poo'd all the arguments against Light Rail will be the ones embarrassed because no one rides the thing. Or, even if a lot of people ride the Light Rail, it won't affect traffic noticeably. I KNOW for a fact it won't affect half the Island as it doesn't service half the Island. It just may affect the major down-town pinch point. I hope so, but doubt it. In any case, that will be the next phase - not the first phase that doesn't go to down town.

So, I'll keep you posted when I return to the Islands this fall. Here's hoping I'm the one embarrassed. For $15 Billion or so, I just hope I'm wrong.

The good news: I'll never live long enough to pay my (and DW's) share of the cost (total $20,000 for us) via taxes. Right now (and for the past 10 years) folks on Oahu have been paying 1/2% sales tax to support the Rail. It's a pittance of the cost, so I look for that to go to 2% or more when all is complete and everyone is happy with the shinny new rail system.

Not a rant, this time. Educational as best I can present it for those who think Light Rail is the next best thing to sliced bread. YMMV of course.

 

[Gumby]

Back in 2015, Connecticut built a bus-only road running between New Britain and Hartford. It was built over old railroad right of way and functions like a light rail system. The CTfastrak, as it is called, was touted as a way to relieve congestion on I-84, which passes through both cities, but as far as anyone can tell, it has not. Those 9.4 miles of road cost over $570 million to build. In 2019, pre-pandemic, it cost $22 million to operate per year and generated $3.9 million in fare revenue from slightly over 15,000 trips per day (assuming each rider takes two trips - to and from work -- that's 7500 riders per weekday.) Ridership declined during the pandemic, but has recovered somewhat to a daily average of about 7000 riders per weekday. And the fare was waived during that time, but has since been reinstituted. I don't have more recent data on the operating cost or the fare revenue, but I would expect the cost to be up and revenue to be down since 2019. If the construction cost is amortized over 20 years, that means the state taxpayers are paying about $27 per person per day just to get about 7000 people to and from work every weekday (0.2% of the state's population).