INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS, PART 2
How two of my favorite cities have been brutalized by our broken systems
They paved paradise and then bickered for a half-century over a commuter rail line.
As discussed in our last article, there are multiple problems that created the high cost of building transportation infrastructure in the US. And yet we still have some of the world’s worst traffic. I know this because our broken transportation infrastructure system has nearly ruined two of my favorite cities: Austin and Honolulu.
Urban planners have a lot of good ideas but lack the authority or clout to get politicians to commit to master plans, raise money or execute construction in a timely manner. Welcome to democracy. Nobody voted for this mess, but somehow our country, which was once the civil engineering marvel of the world, can’t seem to get back to what we once did so well. Everybody wants green but somehow the public is stuck idling in traffic, which as anybody knowledgeable about engines can tell you, produces far more pollution that driving at a reasonable speed.
When we built well
Eisenhower, the last fully trusted and untarnished president in US history, launched the Interstate Highway program in 1956. At the time they levied a penny a gallon tax to pay for it. Our country, full of unity and a can-do attitude, hit the ground running. The tax eventually rose to 18.4 cents for gasoline (24.4 cents for diesel) in 1993 but has been stuck there ever since. Today inflation has cut the value of that in half.
Our inadequate fuel tax doesn’t by itself raise the cost of infrastructure. What it does is delay the execution of important infrastructure projects as politicians scramble for other means of funding and look for shortcuts to pinch pennies. And every year a project is delayed it becomes more expensive and harder to accomplish.
Example: Honolulu
Oahu has a population of over a million people. With probably half of those having jobs between Pearl Harbor and Diamond Head (13 miles as the crow flies) commuter traffic has always been a problem. A 10- or 12-mile commute during rush hour can take almost an hour.
City leaders began discussing a commuter rail system to alleviate the gridlock as far back as 1966. But when President Reagan cut off federal funding for mass transit programs, the proposals were shelved. In 1992 the idea resurfaced but was voted down by the Honolulu city council by a margin of just one vote.
By 2011 the city had resolved the funding issues, answered the environmental objections, neutralized the “Stop Rail Now” movement and started construction. But the original 2006 budget of $4 billion has been continually revised upward until it reached $12.4 billion in 2021. Much of that increase was right-of-way land acquisition costs, which would have been a pittance in the 1960s or 1970s.
The Honolulu elevated rail design is good. The first leg is expected to open this year, but the entire length of the project won’t be complete until 2031. Eventually it will carry up to 6,000 passengers an hour, bringing much needed relief to that city’s streets. And it is appropriate for the community it serves, unlike California’s high-speed rail boondoggle.
Perhaps in time the citizens will see the value of it and approve its extension further east and west. But more than a half-century of delays have driven the costs and completion times through the roof. It should not have been this difficult, or expensive.
Example: Austin
Right up until the late 70s, Austin, Texas was a laid-back city with a small town vibe. But just as the tech boom started to take off in Silicon Gulch, the Austin City Council began filling in with no-growth activists. Wanting to “Keep Austin Weird,” the activists vetoed any proposals to add lane-miles to the city’s road network for 20 years.
Then came NAFTA which turned I-35 into the most heavily trafficked cargo route in the nation. That was followed by hordes of famous people and companies relocating to the city. And no surprise, the interstate today from as far south as San Antonio to as far north as Georgetown now functions for many hours as a 100-mile-long parking lot. Just getting out of downtown Austin and its suburbs can take 30 to 45 minutes.
I have relatives in San Antonio and Austin. We love to get together, but rarely do because the 70-mile trip by car runs the risk of taking three hours. And it can get worse. While in San Antonio a few years back I arranged a date with a woman in Austin. We agreed to meet in Gruene, which is about halfway from each city. It took her three hours to get to Gruene and it took me two hours to get back to San Antonio.
Twenty years ago, I interviewed Landon Jones, a young contractor in Austin. I also happened to be talking to his dad about how bad the traffic was even then. It was his dad who told me about the city council’s record of stonewalling roadbuilding initiatives. But at that point there was yellow iron slung from one end of Austin to the other furiously building new highway capacity. So I asked him, “When do you think they’ll catch up?” His answer:
“Never.”
(Editor’s note: do you have a favorite city that’s been hurt by poor transportation infrastructure planning? Let me know and maybe I’ll write about it. The more examples, the better.)
# # #
Wonderful points. Honolulu transit is a huge issue in their local papers, where a friend has been fruitlessly pleading for years. I live in Boston where the acclaimed four-century-old (dating to a ferry in 1631) T is grudgingly maintained. It is expensive and mostly possible, I think, due to turnpike tolls.