Remember this from just before last year’s November election?
I wonder what all the centrist, but-transit-without-roads-just-isn’t-realistic Seattle editorial writers, bloggers and erstwhile environmentalists who say the roads and transit proposal is the “best we’re ever going to get” are going to say when Prop. 1 fails, as a recent King 5 poll indicates it will? Will they band together and fight for a new light rail package that doesn’t include sprawl-inducing highway expansion—or, as their defeatist endorsements of Prop. 1 indicate, will they just give up?
It’s funny how at the last Sound Transit board meeting, it was one of the “sell-out” environmental groups that dropped off a petition demanding that rail be on the ballot this fall. The Sierra Club has yet to “marry” itself publicly to a “transit only” ballot measure this fall. I’m certain many of their members are a “go,” but… When environmental groups have to spend time convincing other environmental groups of the need for a ballot measure this fall, the entire effort is in jeopardy.
Kill “light rail”. Kill it now.
What a phenomenal waste of financial and space resources. Rail isn’t as efficient as a road on ANY level.
Not for cost, ease-of-use, time-saving, quantity of freight to be handled or dispersed, not for transit, not for ANYTHING. It is one of the BIGGEST BOONDOGGLES in existence today.
Why are ALL the airlines moving to a portal-to-portal system? Because that’s what 99.9% of the CUSTOMERS want. Rail will NEVER be a viable competitor to roads ON ANY LEVEL. Far more freight and people are moved on roads than can ever or will ever be moved on rail. It is a money-pit, a financial sinkhole with NO BENEFIT for the $$$ spent when compared to roads!
And by golly it’s so because cmiklich says it’s so, so there!
So let’s see your roads-only plan, cmklich, what would it look like? How much would IT cost? How would you convince voters to tax themselves to pay for it?
@1
OK, um…
What do you When you add more people to a neighborhood like East Lake, down town Tacoma, Goose Hollow or the Pearl District in Portland where the road network can’t be expanded?
The Sierra Club is being given way too much importance on this issue. They didn’t do anything bug give seattle’s supposed “progressives” a way out of feeling guilty for voting no.
@1: You’re so right. Rail’s a waste. Let’s build more roads. Starting with I-5, to meet the demand for SOV traffic from north of Seattle into downtown, we’ll need 22 lanes inbound into Seattle, and even more lanes to handle the outbound traffic. (See Mark Hallenbeck’s comments in http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/.....stion.html)
I wonder if cmiklich’s house is in that mile-wide swath of residences that will have to be paved under to meet the demand for roads in that corridor?
What do ya’ll think would happen if ST went to the ballot this year and failed again?
Rail will NEVER be a viable competitor to roads ON ANY LEVEL.
Europe says “Hi, remember us”? There are plenty of places in the world where rail works- even in the US (the Amtrak corridor from Washington DC to Boston).
That and, in case you hadn’t noticed, Seattle is surrounded on multiple sides by bodies of water. Engineering bridges over water for roads is massively expensive.
Roads aren’t a panacea. Stop thinking they are.
When environmental groups have to spend time convincing other environmental groups of the need for a ballot measure this fall, the entire effort is in jeopardy.
But of course! This is Seattle, home of $150 million wasted on a monorail that never laid a foot of track over 7 years of public votes.
What the hell made you think cmiklich had even started thinking?
Instead of all this political maneuvering, why not put the time and energy into designing a transit proposition the public will vote for?
@1 Oh, cut the crap! One track can carry 10 times as many people as a freeway lane. Light rail can contribute to an overall transportation strategy in the right circumstances, but it’s not a panacea nor does it eliminate cars. It fills a niche need in urban areas with high-density commuter destinations, and its viability is subject to cost effectiveness considerations, just like everything else. Just because Sound Transit’s scheme is poorly designed and outrageously expensive (and funded with the wrong tax), doesn’t mean light rail isn’t worthwhile where the pieces come together in the right way.
@9
LOL. You win.
@ 5
Don’t feed the trolls!
@ 6
Assuming it gets to the polls (not looking good right now), it would be favored to pass. If it didn’t, you would likely see either a smaller package two years later, or ST would likely have the scope of it’s mission curtailed somehow. It’s tough to tell.
Well, let’s do a little math here (I’ll pretend you folks DIDN’T go to an over-funded, under-achieving public school).
The ST trains, originally advertised as having 6 cars will only have TWO. For possibly SEVERAL YEARS (maybe even FOREVER)!
@40 Passengers per car, that’s max 80 ppl per train. At 6 minutes MINIMUM (statute) following distance, that’s a MAXIMUM of 80 x 10(units of 6 in an hour) = (WOW!!!!) 800 passengers an HOUR! (Which, btw, is approx how long it will take to go from Sea-Tac to downtown.)
Stop the presses! Why, compared to the I-5, 167, 18, 509, 162, 99, etc, etc traffic coming JUST OUT OF THE SOUTH END(!!!!), this is waaaaaaaaaaaay less than 1%. Why, sure this is economical!
NOT!!!!!!!
With a subsidy of several $hundreds per trip, we could buy each OF THESE FOLKS A FERRARI EVER YEAR and STILL SAVE MONEY!!!!!!
And, with the light rail still having stops as far as 8 MILES APART, WHO THE F**K IS GONNA RIDE THE G.D. THING???????
I know you guys are liberal, but fer chrissakes, think some willya please!
@14 –
You lost. Get over it. Light rail is almost here, and with it will come Big Mo for more.
It probably would be best for the agency to wait until 2010, then put forward a real set of comprehensive projects. You know how it works . . . give ’em the first taste for free!
I’m thinking that cmiklich could save a lot of bother in writing posts by going back to old issues of the Oakland Tribune circa 1968.
All of the same arguments about how the system would never work. nobody would ride it, and they should just build more roads and bridges around and across San Francisco Bay.
Just substitute “Sound Transit” for “BART”, and “Puget Sound Region” for “San Francisco Bay Area”.
Last time I checked, the biggest problem with the BART system is that it’s a bit too crowded.
Of course, the Puget Sound region is nothing like the San Francisco Bay area. Our big city is on the Eastern side, theirs is on the West.
Makes all the difference in the world. Something to do with the coriolis effect.
Smiklich @14, your numbers aren’t even close; or maybe this is just your twisted idea of humor….
Sound Transit light rail cars are 95 feet long, each, and have seats for 74 riders, and comfortable standing room for another 125 or so. In round numbers each car can accommodate 200 riders.
ST will begin service next year with 2-car trains. All stations are being built long enough to accommodate 4-car trains, when ridership grows to the level where that’s warranted.
ST has options for an additional 27 cars, beyond its initial fleet of 35 cars, so it can indeed lengthen trains in the future. The Operations & Maintenance Facility on Airport Way has a capacity of 104 light rail cars.
ST will begin service with 6-minute headways during peak hour periods. As service increases over time, the headway on the Rainier Valley light could shrink to 4 minutes. On North Link (Northgate to downtown), headways could be as short as 2 minutes.
So if you want to “do a little math”, at least use real numbers. You are perfectly entitled to your own opinion; you are not entitled to your own facts.
[Totally off topic, thus deleted. Please stay on the topic.]
18 (yawn!)
And he’s no doubt gonna use his marvelous ability to hit “ctl-v” in each of the next half dozen or so threads.
7 If you’re going to talk about “commuter rail” and regional intercity service like DC-to-Boston, between the Sounder and the Cascades we really haven’t done all that badly.
Of course, if getting a crick in your neck and drinking rest stop coffee driving between here and Portland gets your nipples hard, that’s your problem.
One thing’s for certain–if we vacillate long enough about dealing with transit issues, the solution’s going to be a very simple one: shoe leather.
Wow. So much misinformation from too many (im)posters.
Amtrak anywhere (that’s everywhere) is heavily, heavily subsidized.
The #’s I posted for the car size and ridership were ST’s own. Looks like they’ve modified them some. Amazing how the density is increasing. Just like they promised “for certain” to have it all done by 2006. And, who is gonna wanna stand for an HOUR riding a herky-jerky train? Their ridership will be just like the Sounder’s ridership: HALF OF WHAT THEY SAID IT WOULD BE!
Facts are a b!tch. Like the fact that so damned few parking spots are being installed at each station that ridership will be extremely difficult at best. Why would anyone take a bus to the train to the bus?
And those following distances are impossible. A train ain’t like a car. It can’t stop in a reasonable length. Takes forever to get up to speed and forever to stop. Just like planes need long runways. Big difference though: Planes are hella fast. The “light” rail will never be. Even as inefficient as it is (how many people gonna catch it at that Tukwila stop again?).
Q above: How do you “build-out” for roads? Let the market correct for it.
When gas is too expensive, folks will car-pool more (and still save waaaaaaay more time than riding *any* train). They will buy lighter, smaller, more fuel-efficient cars. They will budget their trips.
When the travellers from W Seattle wanna go to Sea-Tac how will the “light” rail work for them? They’ll be paying for it; it should be right there on everybody’s street. Or, how about SouthCenter: How’s that “light” rail work for getting to, well, anywhere?
Fact is, rail is so impractical that ridership is ALWAYS below projected levels when taken as a percentage of the population.
Fact: The Sounder was to have NINE daily trains between Seattle and Tacoma BY 2002!! 2002!! To date (crushing gas prices and all!!!): SIX. That’s right. SIX daily trains!!! They’re leasing them (at a substantial loss!) to Amtrak. Us Puget Sound taxpayers are paying for the mooches on the East Coast twice!!
Fact: Only 21 cents of every dollar is collected from the ridership. SH!T! I pay 110% of what it costs to drive. ‘Cause these bastards are mooches (liberals). And yet, I still save money! And time. Which is also money!
BTW, ST was supposed to have SIX trains a day running from Seattle to Everett. By 2002!!
How’s that working out? They’re up to 3. THREE!!!
Commuting problems, high-gas prices, etc, etc. And still. Folks do NOT want to ride a time-consuming, expensive, inefficient train!
cmliklich @ 22: your reference to Adam-Smith economics, with respect to transit, doesn’t apply very much. The problem is that demand is rarely “elastic” in this respect – commuters can’t easily switch form one system to another everytime the gas prices go up, and neither can communities build or not build transit systems every time the price of gas goes up (or down) a quarter. It requires considerable advance planning and investment long before the demand is apparant.
For example, I drive daily to and from my home in Everett to my work in Bellevue. The reason? Free parking, gas prices which are only marginally higher than the bus fares, the lack of a direct route making my door-to-door commute longer, and the fact that I already have an investment in my automobile, and the flexibility which having a car at my disposal provides me.
If I had a train which got me to and from my work, with transit lines within easy walking distance from home & work, I would take it if I could then forego the considerable investment I have to make in owning a car. At that point, it pays off for me.
But they aren’t going to be able to measure that desire, because I’m not going to sell my car based upon current bus routes. Just because I’m using a car now doesn’t mean I will prefer to do so if they build a fast-rail system. If they do build a direct rail link, I probably will use it. In other words, if they build it, I will come. Until then, I’m keeping my car.
If we followed your logic, then we never would have built a trans-continental rail system, because mid-1800’s polls indicated that people were using wagons to cross the praries, and presumably they would continue to do so even if a rail line were built.
I’ve seen the Japanese rail system at work in Japan, and it’s great. If we can put together a system that works anything close to what they have, then you will see ridership patterns change considerably.
In most places served by mass transit, when the service is expanded, ridership follows pretty quickly. One common mistake transit planners make is to yield to the naysayers and provide service only during peak commute hours.
My wife and I go to one Mariners game a month (we buy part of someone else’s season ticket) and usually take the bus. She hurt her knee last week and has been hobbling on a cane, so Saturday we decided to drive. We could have paid 25 bucks to park in the Safeco Field garage and walk about twice as far as we would have from the bus stop, but instead paid $12 to walk yet another block. Took us forever to get out of the post-game jam-up and get home.
It really doesn’t matter whether the wheels are made of steel or rubber or plasticized frozen elephant smegma. All of us getting around in our individual steel boxes is just plain stupid, and it’s still going to be stupid even if we shrink the cars into, to borrow a phrase from Joe Bageant, “self-powered roller skates that we strap to our butts”. It’s becoming even stupider than that now that we’re blowing up children in Iraq and starving them in Haiti so we can put whiskey in our gas tanks.
Cmiklich @22: Please identify the Sound Transit documents (or Web pages) that misstated the size and capacity of Link light rail. Those will be fixed (if they exist — which I very much doubt!!)
Herky Jerky train? Spoken just like a man who has never ridden one (or a bus, for that matter). Go to Portland sometime and ride their MAX train. Not as good as Link light rail, but still the opposite of herky jerky.
No parking at light rail stations, except Tukwila. Right on that one. ST had a lot of dialog with Seattle neighborhoods and, funny thing, none of them wanted to tear down even more houses and stores to build parking lots! Access to light rail stations can be had by walking, bicycling, and the bus.
As regular transit riders know, transit is a SYSTEM. Experience in other cities has shown that riders will indeed transfer — especially when the train will get them from their station to downtown in about half the time of the bus.
Re stopping distances and starting times, etc. You’re talking about freight trains. When the Link train leaves a station, the last car will be moving at 35mph as it leaves the platform end.
You seem to enjoy passing gas on this topic. If you ever want to get serious, please let us know.
The reason why transportation is such a mess is because the people in this state vote liberals into office. Liberals screw up everything they touch (just look at the Seattle public schools).
Who is “us”? The “Borg”?
At one time, ST stated how big/small their cars were gonna be. Like everything else, especially ST’s costs, they’ve magically morphed into something much, much bigger. (I especially like how a rail car made in Japan is quantified as “made in the USA”.)
Can you fix the voter’s pamphlets to more accurately reflect the true costs as well? So that we may know precisely the cost BEFORE voting?
And, as I’ve stated before here, I have ridden Amtrak to see what it was actually like. The old Coast Starlight ain’t as smooth as a ’48 Packard, that’s for sure. (It also don’t run end-to-end, but, like ST not making it from Northgate to S 200th, that’s another story.)
The parking lot mess in Auburn has turned dozens of riders away. I know a few people that took the train from Auburn to Seattle, until the parking lots got too full and at that point, they decided to drive it rather than risk arriving in the parking lot to no space available, and even with the parking lot packed, the train isn’t yet.
What would the cost be per household? Will this be another gas tax, property tax, sales tax? How are they planning on paying for this tax wise?
http://www.komotv.com/news/17669954.html
@31 – I posted that Ken Schram on another thread….Of all people to be against ST!!! I was amazed!