Advocating Accountability & Wise Transportation
Solutions
T |
he OÔahu Coalition for Affordable,
Flexible Transit advocates construction of the most technologically advanced,
affordable, flexible, convenient, and safest mass transit system within the limited
means of O`ahuÕs small tax base.
Recognizing the great cultural diversity of our island home, our
coalition includes local organizations and individuals who believe that our
rail system must be built in harmony with every rural community and urban area
that it is intended to serve.
To ensure this harmony, our rail system
must be capable of operating either at ground level (at-grade) or
elevated. We believe that at-grade
construction will be preferable in many areas, while other areas may require
elevated construction, and that such a flexible system, using newer, proven,
and readily-available light-rail technology could be built faster and at lower
cost. In addition, such a flexible system could eventually serve more
communities, would be more-compatible with historic districts and would require
less maintenance than the currently proposed all-elevated rail system.
We believe that such a flexible system
would have the fewest negative environmental, social, and cultural impacts
during and after construction, and that these attributes will also reduce the
estimated $5.4 billion (or more likely $8 to 9 billion due to inevitable cost
overruns and construction delays) economic impact of an inflexible,
all-elevated rail system which cannot be safely brought to grade because of the
high potential for human and animal electrocution by its outmoded ÒhotÓ
third-rail technology.
We remain greatly concerned about the
proposed all-elevated rail system due to its high costs, long construction
time, immediate and future impact on adjacent agricultural lands, the likely
disturbance of Hawaiian burial sites, massive cutting and displacement of
hundreds of ÒnotableÓ and other trees, physical damage to historic sites and
their surroundings, obstruction of mauka-makai
views, bisecting neighborhoods and
divided towns, and impeding access to the Honolulu waterfront from downtown
streets.
W |
e are not alone in voicing these
concerns, and the all-elevated rail system as presently proposed is heavily
criticized in many-dozens of letters of comment made to the recent Draft
Environmental Impact Statement including those from:
Moreover, additional concerns about the
security and vulnerability of public buildings have been raised in writing by
the U.S. District Court, the U.S. Marshal for the District of Hawai'i, and the
U.S. General Services Administration. Additionally, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency has raised significant questions about the projectÕs impact
on OahuÕs water quality, aquatic resources, and important wetlands. These and
the many other letters voicing similar concerns can be viewed at http://belammc.com/pdfs/HHCTCPDraftEIS.pdf
NOTE: This
1389-page file will take several minutes to load in your browser.
The proposed all-elevated rail system
and its massive stations – all two-thirds the length of a football field
and looming from 40 to 90 feet overhead – would be a visually intrusive,
monolithic concrete structure extending for 20 miles, and eventually 29 miles,
slicing through O`ahuÕs landscape.
Regardless of how these massive
concrete structures are designed, painted, and decorated, they will require
expensive, long-term maintenance and repair, similar to the Aloha Stadium.
According to all available data, the
proposed all-elevated rail system will cost $270 million per mile to construct,
while the at-grade system would cost $70 million per mile. Using the newest light rail technology
with its easily-accessible low-floor cars and its safe, new wireless
intermittent electric power supply operating at-grade for one-half the 20-mile
segment would save $2 billion from the initial $5.4 billion all-elevated
system.
In addition, future at-grade extensions
could be easily extended to the UH and Waikiki as well as to areas like Ewa
Beach, Ko Olina, Nanakuli, Mililani, and Wahiawa.
In addition, knowledgeable engineers advise us the at-grade
rail system requires grading only 18Ó to 24Ó in depth to install, whereas the
elevated rail construction requires excavation up to 10-feet deep and with very deep footings every 150 feet for support columns. As planned, the construction will likely
disturb Hawaiian burial sites and will require the relocation and/or major
reconstruction of existing utilities and roadways. This drastic course of action holds great potential to
produce another Boston ÒBig DigÓ mega-project financial fiasco, running years
behind schedule and monstrously over-budget. O`ahuÕs small population and limited tax base can ill afford
this very real risk.
HawaiÔi's recent unfortunate
SuperFerry EIS experience has sent a clear message that, before the Honolulu
City Council commits any of its citizensÕ hard-earned tax dollars to pay for
construction of any portion of the rail project, the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) must first approve the CityÕs final Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) and issue a federal ÒRecord of DecisionÓ on the project to
demonstrate that the EIS process has been completed. In order for the
City's expenditures on the first phase (East Kapolei to Pearl Highlands) of the
project prior to issuance of a final EIS
and a subsequent entering into the federal ÒFull Funding Grant Agreement,Ó
the FTA would have to issue a ÒLetter of No PrejudiceÓ to the City and County
of Honolulu.
In short, circumventing
this legally required EIS process and beginning construction with no assurance
of federal funds will ultimately jeopardize any federal funds anticipated by
the city.
On Wednesday, June 10, 2009, the City Council will probably
move ahead with the proposed rail project without either the necessary federal
environmental approvals or a written federal funding commitment. The
result of this action would be that the issuance of $1.1 billion in bonds,
together with the future interest, would require repayment entirely by the
OÔahu taxpayers, with a possible denial of any and all currently anticipated
federal funding.
We
believe that the following principles must be acknowledged by the City Council
before any contracts are awarded by the City Administration, which would commit
our small county's future generations to a very expensive, irreversible, and
inflexible course of action:
W |
e fully concur with The American
Institute of Architects-Honolulu Chapter Public Policy Statement on
Transportation. http://www.aiahonolulu.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=261
This ethical, professional statement
encourages providing and promoting the following:
á
Òthe use
of social, environment, and aesthetic criteria as well as economic efficiency
in the design of routes and supporting facilities for all transit modesÓ
á
Òsafe and
healthy environments for transit passengers, pedestrians and neighborhood
residents along the transit routeÓ
á
Òsafe and
easy accessibilityÓ
á
Òsustainable
planning, design, and operationÓ
á
ÒIn
keeping with sustainable practices, transit systems and facilities should offer
the ability to meet present needs without compromising those of future
generations.Ó
Current Coalition Members
At this writing,
many other boards, executive directors, and individuals are deliberating
joining us and we will be updating this list accordingly.
Hawai`i Advocates For
Consumer Rights
http://www.scottfoster.org/afcr/
Hawai`i Independent
Democrats
http://hawaiiindependentdemocrats.org/
League of Women
Voters-Honolulu
http://www.lwv-hawaii.com/honolulu.htm
Hawaii's 1000 Friends
http://www.hawaiis1000friends.org/
Mr.
Randy Ching
Mr.
Geoffrey Paterson, AIA Emeritus
Please
advise Scott Foster fosters005@hawaii.rr.com
to add your name, title, and/or
organization
-###-