July 24, 2008 at 12:58 pm
by Ben Schiendelman
It doesn’t look like I can embed it here, but the link is here.
First Federal Way checked in with their support. Burien was next. Washington State Transit Association spoke in favor of expansion. Snohomish County Councilmember Mike Cooper just spoke in favor, talking about Ruth Fisher (the room they’re in is named after her), about improving the economy with public works projects – as Magnuson and FDR spearheaded locally and nationally.
Jim Horn (and a friend placed there to make him look even more ancient by comparison), both looking really angry (these guys always look like goblins), just pushed the ETA agenda. All he’s doing is spewing numbers… haha, the suburbs are a “market share already well served by buses”. Yeah, RIGHT. Oh, and it “doesn’t make sense” to build light rail to the eastside, either! What’s funny is that Horn, as a state senator, endorsed I-745 in 2000, which would have moved 90% of transportation funding (even ST funding) to roads. And they claim not to be anti-transit! Basically every one of the things they’ve just said are flat out lies – claims that light rail will increase congestion on I-90? Not by doubling I-90′s capacity, it won’t.
1:45: Enough with the crazies. Up next another real human being, Lisa Utter, Lynnwood City Council member, speaking out in support. Mayor Jerry Smith and councilmember Matsumoto of Mountlake Terrace, speaking in support. “If the eastside doesn’t want their money, we’ll be happy to take it on our side!” from Mayor Smith. Nice jab at ETA!
1:47: Sara Nikolic of Futurewise speaking in favor of ST2! She’s pointing out that Sound Transit was *created* to build rail, not buses. Express buses are here to build ridership for long term transit solutions that allow better land use planning, mixed use, walkable communities.
1:50: Marty Evons of Everett, who has basically no clue what’s happening on I-90. Oh, yeah, a “savings of billions” – to move fifty people instead of fifty thousand. The same crap we’ve gotten from the ETA.
1:52: Ian Terry of Issaquah, speaking out in favor – about how people’s commutes are changing, and we need to build public transportation.
1:56: Wiiiiiill Knedlik! Local anti-transit nut speaking next. “Supports putting the measure on the ballot so it can be defeated a second time.” Claims to be a rail supporter – but appears to be a conspiracy theorist, claiming Sound Transit has censored old board minutes, taking our money. He has a “handout” – oh, man, how many hundred billion does he claim ST2 is this time? Last year he claimed Sound Transit was spending a TRILLION DOLLARS. Nut.
2:00: Former Mayor of Mercer Island Aubrey Davis in support of building ST2, especially East Link. “We’ve been talking about this for forty years. Let’s get going.” He was followed with applause from the room!
2:03: John Worthington, of Renton, speaking next. He’s a PRT nut! Claims we could connect every urban center in the region with super transit pods that go everywhere and do everything. Apparently we could run these pods over the 520 bridge, too! No friction? Oh, it’s MAGLEV PODS. I love how the crazies come out for these meetings.
Tally is 9 for the system, 5 against – all either crazy or underinformed. Looks like public comment is over, I’ll update with more of interest as it comes in.
2:12: The current speaker is writing about coordination and cost estimate methodology. The Independent Review Team’s panel report essentially says “Sound Transit, you’re doing a good job planning, your methodology is good, keep it up, we’ve still got some more work to do, but keep it up.”
2:18: Consent agenda! The Board just signed the ST staff’s paychecks. My boss only wishes he got to do that at a public meeting.
2:19: Here we go, items 7A and 7B, it’s time to vote on ST2.
July 23, 2008 at 11:30 pm
by Andrew Smith
The Sierra Club asks, Does a mile in a car equal a mile on a train? Apparently not:
Pushkarev and Zupan in their pioneering 1980 study compared the six American regions with rail transit (New York-northeastern New Jersey, Chicago, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Boston and Cleveland) to other U.S. urban areas over 2 million population, concluding that for every p-m (STB: Passenger Mile) ridden on transit, four vehicle miles were not driven.
It’s an interesting read, if a bit technical.
July 23, 2008 at 11:23 pm
by Andrew Smith
According to the 520 Tolling Committee that could be the toll. If it’s each way, round trip would be $6.85, costing about $1712.50 a year for driving. That’s crazy, I’m guessing the 545 is going to get even more crowded.
July 23, 2008 at 11:50 am
by Martin H. Duke
Since we’ve had a sudden infusion of new readers, I thought it might be a good time to produce a primer on what it is that we do here, and what we believe.
This blog has many purposes: general news & information about transit in the Puget Sound; debates on the merits of various small transit projects like RapidRide, the Seattle Streetcar, and Eastside Commuter rail; and stuff we think, as transit fans, is simply “neat.” In the current context, however, our most interesting role is policy advocacy.
Our blog authors are private citizens that live in Kent and Seattle, and work both in Seattle and various places on the Eastside. Although we have many disagreements over the priorities of various smaller projects, the authors share three core convictions that come across in the blog, and they all lead to our endorsement of Sound Transit 2.
1) Transit investment is generally better than highway investment. All modes of transportation receive government subsidy, and the question is where those resources are best used. Although light rail is often attacked for being expensive or not cost-effective, in fact the cost per rider compares quite favorably with most projects that improve highway capacity. Furthermore, transit has significant benefits in terms of pollution, global warming, sprawl reduction, public health, and social equality.
2) The regional transit backbone should be rail, not “bus rapid transit”. There are a multitude of reasons for our conviction on this point, but this post is a pretty good summary of some of the most important arguments. If you search our archives, you can find many, many other posts about BRT that marshal some additional points. Throughout those comment threads, you can read some of the arguments and counter-arguments that have arisen between our authors and various factions of the readership.
3) For all practical purposes, Sound Transit is the only game in town. There are as many rail plans as there are rail advocates. However, the Sound Transit plans are a mix of sophisticated technical analysis and recognition of the political realities necessary to win a public vote. Although I’m sure your rail plan — whatever it might be — has its own merits, as a practical matter going back to the drawing board is a recipe for delay. Given the spiraling cost of construction over time, the reduced quality of life as we wait for program completion, and the quality of the plan on the table, the additional benefits of some other plan are likely to be overwhelmed. In particular, I’d like to refer to Ben’s excellent piece on why light rail has to cross I-90 instead of SR 520.
Additionally, Sound Transit has emerged from an initial period of organizational disarray to become a well-managed organization that meets its objectives, plans conservatively, and passes audits with flying colors. Attempts to reorganize or replace it with something else risks the depletion of valuable staff experience, renewed organizational chaos, and more decades of delay.
******************
I hope you decide to visit frequently, or subscribe to our RSS feed. Even if you hate rail, I think there’s pretty useful discussion of local bus route planning, news of events, and healthy debate between advocates of various plans.
Although this principle is typically honored in the breach, I ask that commenters refrain from personal attacks and impugning motives of others. Our comment thread is, at best, a very educational exchange of facts, and I hope that we can expand that professional tone.
July 22, 2008 at 4:41 pm
by Ben Schiendelman
Welcome Seattle Times readers!
“10 lame reasons to delay mass transit” has ten pretty amusing reasons to delay a transit vote – like “you can worry more about climate change” and “standing all the way home [on the packed bus] improves your calf muscles and physical stamina.”
I have one – if we wait two more years, the people living in new development in downtown will have no way to get to work. They’ll start more small businesses!
If you’ve got more, share ‘em. Also, vote on the Seattle Times poll for light rail this year!
In the meantime, we have a great transit package to pass, building light rail as well as investing immediately in increasing express bus and Sounder service. This is the best opportunity we’ve had in forty years to connect our region – Sound Transit 2 will create real regional solutions to our transportation mess. Keep checking back here for news on the package, what it will do for you, and why we need it!
July 22, 2008 at 8:54 am
by Ben Schiendelman
As you all likely know, Sound Transit’s board votes Thursday for a November ballot measure.
With that vote will come the beginning of a campaign we must win. The stakes are higher this year: A loss could well be the end of Sound Transit, the board replaced with new elected officials who would almost definitely shift transit money to roads. University Link could be cannibalized to replace 520. The team that’s been put together – today chomping at the bit to build when we say go, desks covered in designs and plans – would be lost to other cities. We would have to start over.
A win will offer a real alternative to highway expansion, giving us the tool we need to prevent sprawl. A win will keep Sound Transit delivering projects, and put the agency in a safe position from which to strike out with acceleration or expansion in a few years. A win will show the younger generation there is a better way.
Opposition will be fierce this year. The Seattle Times will attack every week. The Van Dyks and Kemper Freemans will say highways and vanpools are all we need. We know better, we know how to make our arguments, and this is the time to start going on the offensive.
Friday, let’s meet. The Columbia City Ale House, 7 pm. We’ll bring maps and talking points, everyone bring your brain and your ideas. We’ll make sure to have someone from the campaign, there may be volunteer opportunities, and I’m sure we can organize some action of our own.
July 22, 2008 at 12:00 am
by Andrew Smith
Photo from Jade Gordon, found in the STB Flickr Pool.
July 21, 2008 at 12:52 pm
by Ben Schiendelman
A press release from Mayor Nickels’ office today – an apt comparison between the Eastside Transportation Association (essentially developer Kemper Freeman’s anti-transit front) and the Wizard of Oz – just wanting to click their heels. “Auntie Em, There’s no place like open roads!” isn’t solving anything:
We know who is behind the curtain of the Eastside Transportation Association – the same people whose only answer to the problems of climate pollution and congestion are more freeways, more traffic, and more frustration. Under Sound Transit’s new proposal, light rail would be extended to Bellevue, as well as Lynnwood and Federal Way. Those who are lining up against this common-sense measure are stuck in their own personal Oz, a place where our most pressing challenges can be wished away by laying more asphalt. This November, we look forward to presenting our bus, commuter and light rail solution – a way forward that will cost the average driver the equivalent of one tank of gas a year. Because we know building a better future takes more than clicking your heels and hoping our gridlock will go away.
We know that “ETA” has no real plan. The $11 billion expansion plan for I-405 will carry a fraction of the people ST2 will. Light rail is far more cost effective, and we’re dreaming if we think adding more lanes will help us deal with gas prices. It’s nice to have our mayor leading the fight this year!
July 21, 2008 at 8:53 am
by Eric Butler
We’ve talked about the problems with both Governor Christine Gregoire and challenger Dino Rossi’s transportation policies in the past, but things just keep getting worse.
The Seattle Times ran a story a few days back talking about how neither of them are making Sound Transit 2 a campaign issue.
The most troubling part of the article is this quote:
Meanwhile, Rossi says he considers Sound Transit a local issue: “I don’t even have an idea what they’re interested in doing.”
This shows Rossi’s lack of interest in inter-agency cooperation. Sound Transit and the WSDOT work together on many projects including HOV/transit direct access freeway ramps and the Point Defiance rail bypass. It’s also no secret that most of the state’s traffic problems are within the Sound Transit district, so it’s very disappointing that someone who wants to be governor hasn’t taken the time to educate himself.
Meanwhile over in the PI, Rossi brings up an issue we all wish was over: an 8 lane option for 520, claiming that the cost would be roughly the same (note this correction). This comes years after a state study concluded an 8 lane highway would cost much more and create too much additional traffic, further clogging I-5 and the areas surrounding each end of the bridge.
Both of these issues show once again that although Christine Gregoire is very far from perfect, Dino Rossi could do a lot more damage.
July 20, 2008 at 11:35 am
by Ben Schiendelman
This morning the Times has an editorial saying Sound Transit shouldn’t put light rail on the ballot. Their reasons are suspect, and their logic is twisted.
They continue to push the “don’t-take-my-express-lanes-away” agenda – the purely self-interested stance. Early in the hit piece they say:
Perhaps, though they might say yes for a mix of transit less-biased toward rail.
This package is a mix of transit less biased toward rail. Last year’s package was some 95% light rail. This year’s package is more like 70% – with big increases for ST Express. I don’t think even the Times can argue against more Sounder.
They go on to talk about boardings between buses and rail. First they talk about 477,000 boardings per day by our other transit agencies. Then they talk about ONLY the conservative ridership estimates (which should be boosted by the TOD we’ve built just since those numbers were calculated) for Central Link. They ignore University Link, ST Express, and Sounder. But wait, those apparently don’t exist!
For actual bus service, Metro charges an 0.9 percent sales tax. For promised light-rail service, Sound Transit has been charging 0.4 percent. You can move many, many more people for the money on buses than on rail.
Okay, so… Metro currently has daily boardings of about 370,000 for their .9%. Sound Transit already has 45,000 weekday boardings on ST Express, 10,000 weekday boardings on Sounder service – with 50% more service yet to add – and will have not only 45,000 daily boardings on Central Link, but later another 70,000 boardings on University Link (still part of that .4%). Also remember that the 370,000 daily boardings on Metro will drop on some of their core routes as people ride rail instead – the 7, 36, 42, 194, and others will see drops in ridership even next year.
So, .4%? In 2030, without ST2, that would be 200,000 riders a day. More than half the ridership of Metro for less than half the money. There’s another interesting component here. ST Express and Sounder trips are far longer, on average, than Metro trips. Sound Transit takes their passengers today 17 miles on average, but Metro takes their passengers under 5 miles. That’s more than three times the miles traveled for those boardings!
In 2030, with ST2, just Sound Transit’s rail services will carry more passenger miles than all our local bus agencies combined – with about the same tax rate. Link and Sounder combined will carry .9 billion passenger miles per year. All the buses – ST, ET, PT, CT, MT – will carry .6 billion. As we pay off those bonds, it will cost a third as much to operate. The Times’ own argument works against them.
They’re stuck in the fifties, when we hadn’t yet learned from our mistakes and we didn’t yet understand development:
Think of all the places buses go — in all three counties — and look at the map of where light rail will go, twenty years from now. Light rail is two strands, in the shape of a T. Bus service is a spider web.
Development follows transportation infrastructure. In Seattle, a hundred years ago, development was along strands of rail. You can see this today – wherever there are clusters of old brick buildings in our neighborhoods, they surrounded a rail line. Buses can only map the sprawl that occurred after we got rid of that rail – they can’t affect it. The fact that this strand of light rail will carry as much of our traffic as Metro’s huge web should make it painfully clear that ST2 is where we need our next transportation investments.
July 19, 2008 at 11:16 am
by Martin H. Duke
The Times reports this morning that Tim Eyman’s measure will definitely be on the ballot.
It would create a traffic-congestion-relief fund by tapping car-sales taxes, revenues from red-light-camera tickets and the money set aside for art on transportation projects.
The initiative also would require cities to synchronize traffic signals and open car-pool lanes outside rush hours.
There really isn’t enough time in the day to go through all the things wrong with this proposal, although the total lack of attention to road maintenance — with bridges threatening to collapse all over the state — is pretty galling, even if you’re pro-road.
If you read this blog, you’re probably pretty strongly disinclined to vote for an Eyman initiative anyway, but I’ll also point out that opening up HOV lanes to general traffic is a direct assault on the Express Bus system, and the potential for any Bus Rapid Transit line. The position of various public figures on I-985 will be a pretty good discriminator between those who genuinely believe BRT is the best transit solution in the region, and those who merely use it as an excuse to attack light rail.
I personally believe that many BRT advocates (Doug MacDonald?) are arguing in good faith, and we’ll find out who those people are real soon.
Furthermore, the existence of the kind of sentiment expressed in I-985 is a good argument against BRT in itself. When you construct asphault for the sole use of buses, there’s always going to be some segment of the population agitating to turn it over to cars. That doesn’t happen with train tracks.
July 19, 2008 at 8:13 am
by Ben Schiendelman
(and next time I’ll try to make this kind of post before the weekend)
Today is the Roosevelt Bull Moose festival. Sound Transit will have a table there – stop by! I’ll be there for part of the morning as well. Sound Transit 2 includes a subway station right there at 65th and 12th Ave NE, with a south entrance on that corner and a north entrance up in what is currently the QFC parking lot. That QFC lot will be the staging area and tunnel boring machine launch site as well, I believe.
There are some simple plans for Roosevelt station here, and I’m working on getting bigger versions of the site layout (squint for now, sorry).
Tomorrow is Sustainable Capitol Hill‘s street festival, and Sound Transit will be there too, hopefully with Link outreach staff talking about the new station. Construction on that should start in December (okay, groundbreaking) – and I walked by a few days ago to see that nearly every shop window has information about the new locations of the businesses. Most looked very close by, which is great! When I talked to Vivace staff a few months ago, they seemed pretty pleased with the move – it’ll put them right on Broadway, position them closer to higher earners (which will help with the recession), and apparently they’re buying the new location (correct me if I’m wrong).
July 18, 2008 at 8:05 am
by Martin H. Duke
1) 125 of the 385 spaces at the Burien Transit Center will be closed to allow some construction there. I understand they’re putting in new bays. There’s alternate parking all over the place, as listed where I linked.
2) Sound Transit has new Google Maps mashup of Central LINK, which is a nice companion to the Google Maps tour that Ben did a while back. Unfortunately, the Convention Place Station is incorrectly depicted as a stop, and the feedback link is busted.
Update: The Convention Place mistake is fixed.
July 18, 2008 at 7:34 am
by Ben Schiendelman
You might be noticing this morning that both papers have jumped quickly on the news that the FTA has asked Sound Transit to add additional money to the U Link contingency fund.
I want to point out how positive it is that the FTA then turned around and offered us nearly half of what they wanted added to the budget. They’re saying “This is the most cost effective light rail project in the country” (I’m paraphrasing, but it is) – and they want to ensure that we have enough money to cover any cost increases.
What I don’t appreciate is this spin from the two local papers. The cost of the light rail tunnel hasn’t changed a penny. The contingency funds available in case the cost does change have been increased. $128 million in unspent project reserves are soon to be released from Central Link – but that doesn’t look bad, especially when that’s greater than what Sound Transit needs to add to contingency funds for U Link, and it points out that Sound Transit’s planning is solid. Why write about that?
Another little jab from the P-I – claiming that the ST2 plan doesn’t offer immediate service? Yes, as a matter of fact, it does. Bus service increases would go online almost immediately – I suspect that’s what got Reardon on board. Sounder service increases would happen in just a few years. This package balances the now with the later. Good planning just doesn’t make for sensational reporting.
Update: It’s been pointed out to me that the $128 million we have left over from Central Link was requested by the FTA in nearly exactly the same situation in 2003. So it’s even more interesting that it went unmentioned in today’s Times and P-I articles. I want Jane Hadley back.
July 18, 2008 at 5:00 am
by John Jensen
According to the P-I, the Federal Transit Administration is asking Sound Transit to set aside extra money in case tunneling from Downtown Seattle to Husky Stadium ends up costing more than projected:
Federal officials, asked to contribute to what may become a $1.9 billion budget, want Sound Transit to add $150 million in “contingency” money to its budget for the 3.15-mile University Link, with the Federal Transit Administration contributing $63 million of that amount and Sound Transit the rest. Sound Transit officials said the agency has enough money to put up its share.
“We want to make sure they don’t exceed cost estimates,” said an FTA official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he is not routinely allowed to speak to reporters.
[...]
The Beacon Hill tunnel and other work is behind schedule, delayed by problems excavating a station under the hill, difficulties controlling underground water and slower-than-anticipated progress completing the tunnel drilling. In February 2007, the job was shut down after a worker died in an accident.
The $279 million bid for the tunnel construction by the contractor, Obayashi Corp., was 15 percent higher than the engineers’ estimate, the federal official said. Sound Transit has used money in contingency accounts for the initial 13.9-mile rail segment from downtown Seattle to Sea-Tac Airport to pay the added tunnel costs.
The agency now expects to pay Obayashi $305 million for the work, 27 percent higher than the engineer’s pre-construction estimate of $239 million and 9 percent higher than Obayashi’s bid.
[...]
But Sound Transit spokesman Geoff Patrick said tunnels are “the highest risk construction,” and the federal official said the FTA team monitoring Sound Transit’s light-rail construction noticed cost overruns in rail tunnels being built with financial assistance in Pittsburgh, New York City and Los Angeles
Read the full piece for more. Transit agencies are notorious for under-estimating costs in the public’s mind, so it always helps to keep the house in order.
July 17, 2008 at 8:28 pm
by Andrew Smith
Or at least for going to the ballot with it this year. The Cascade Chapter of the Sierra Club’s transportation chair Tim Gould and chapter chair Mike O’Brien make the case for letting the public vote on transit expansion this year:
Last year voters turned down Proposition 1, a package that included 50 miles of light rail and 182 miles of highways. The Sierra Club opposed that package because the additional highway lanes would swamp all benefits of increased transit and worsen global warming. Today, the Sierra Club supports Sound Transit presenting the best possible transit-only plan to voters in November.
They continue to highlight the major arguments for transit expansion, first the environment:
Transit alternatives will help reduce global warming pollution, half of which comes from vehicles in this region. Scientists say we need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent by 2050 to avoid the catastrophic effects of global warming. James Hansen of NASA says carbon in the atmosphere has passed the critical level of 350 parts per million and we must act immediately to reduce it.
and the affordibility issue.
With gas prices soaring, demand for alternatives to driving is surging. Around Seattle, the average household spends 53 percent of its income on housing and transportation costs. Transportation costs alone account for more of our income than food and health care combined. And it is getting worse; this data is from 2000 when gas cost $1.59 per gallon compared with Washington’s recent average of $4.37.
And then rebute a few of the major arguments against transit expansion, ie, we could do things sooner with buses, we should wait, and that we should try to find a pancea ballot measure that will solve everything.
It’s a good piece, and it’s better to see the Sierra Club on the our side this time around.
July 17, 2008 at 4:40 pm
by Martin H. Duke
Here’s the press release:
Sound Transit Board chair, vice chairs endorse 2008 mass transit measure
July 17, 2008
The top three governing officials of the Sound Transit board today announced their support for putting a mass transit ballot measure on the November ballot. The full Sound Transit board may vote July 24 on the 15-year proposal, which will offer expanded bus, commuter and light rail in Snohomish, King and Pierce counties.
“This plan provides a mass transit package that is faster, better and cheaper than last year’s Proposition 1,” said Sound Transit Board Chair and Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels. “We can’t afford to wait when we have the solutions to our transportation crisis right now. For the price of one tank of gas per year, we move forward with a regional mass transit network in three counties that gives people what they need most: an alternative to paying high gas prices. The best way to avoid the high cost of gas is not to buy it in the first place.”
“The new plan before the Board gets light rail to Snohomish County while increasing and speeding up ST Express regional bus service expansions,” said Sound Transit Board Vice Chair and Snohomish County Executive Aaron Reardon. “It responds to Snohomish County commuters’ immediate needs, and at the same time, it delivers a light rail connection to Lynnwood while positioning us for a future extension to Everett.”
“This 15-year plan turns the nearly $1 billion we would lose to inflation over the next two years into rapid progress toward better transit connections for people in Pierce County and around the region,” said Sound Transit Board Vice Chair and Lakewood City Council Member Claudia Thomas. “It delivers significant Sounder commuter rail and ST Express expansions while moving forward now with planning and property purchases to set the stage for getting light rail to Tacoma in the future.”
Nickels, Reardon, Thomas and other Sound Transit Board leaders will discuss the merits of the plan on July 24, when the Board plans to decide whether to move forward with a package this year. The package’s capital projects would cost $13.3 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars that include inflation estimates, or $9.1 billion in 2007 dollars. Funding would come from a 0.5 percent increase of the local sales tax, or 5 cents on a $10 purchase. The approximately $69 annual cost of the increase for each adult is around the cost of a single tank of gas.
The transit-only package would deliver projects significantly faster than last year’s Proposition 1 measure. The construction costs are 50 percent lower than Proposition 1, which included both roads and transit projects, and 23 percent lower than the 20-year transit package that was part of Proposition 1.
The new plan responds to public input received in May and June, which showed strong desire to see light rail extended further north and south than was proposed in 12-year options identified in April. Details of the 15-year plan include:
- Northward expansion of light rail from the University of Washington to Northgate by 2020, with a further extension to Lynnwood by 2023, five years earlier than last year’s Proposition 1 measure.
- Eastward expansion of light rail to Bellevue and onward to Overlake Transit Center in Redmond by 2021, seven years earlier than Proposition 1.
- Southward expansion of light rail to Highline Community College by 2020 and Federal Way’s South 272nd Street area by 2023, five years earlier than Proposition 1.
- Major ST Express bus service improvements, including a first phase delivered prior to completion of a new maintenance base and a second phase afterward. The plan provides service increases of 10 to 30 percent in key corridors and bus rapid transit service on State Route 520.
- Sounder Commuter Rail service expansions remain unchanged from the 12-year options, including longer trains and more trips on the line between Lakewood and Seattle.
Improved station access: Funding to increase access to transit facilities in Auburn, Edmonds, Kent, Lakewood, Mukilteo, Puyallup, South Tacoma, Sumner, Tacoma and Tukwila. Projects will be tailored to the needs of each location and may include expanded parking; pedestrian improvements at or near stations; additional bus/transfer facilities for improved feeder service to stations; bicycle access and storage; and new and expanded drop-off areas to encourage ride-sharing.
Partnerships for expanded transit: Partnership funding for Eastside passenger rail on existing freight tracks; as well as for potential extensions of Tacoma Link light rail and projects in Bothell and Burien.
More information on the 15-year plan and other options is available at www.future.soundtransit.org.
Sound Transit’s system of regional express buses, commuter rail and light rail currently carries about 55,000 riders each day, a number that will more than double following the 2009 opening of light rail service between downtown Seattle and Sea-Tac International Airport. Construction of that light rail line is moving forward on schedule and is more than 90 percent complete.
Expansion of Link light rail between downtown and the University of Washington is slated to begin this year and be completed in 2016. University Link is projected to increase the regional light rail system’s ridership to more than 114,000 a day by 2030.
July 17, 2008 at 4:28 pm
by Martin H. Duke
Perhaps it’s outdated by Andrew’s tip, but there’s a marvelous piece at Crosscut today where David Brewster does some solid political reporting on the board vote. Apparently, the key transaction is that Nickels is moving a bit in Reardon’s direction on who pays for the the 145th to 185th St line.
Whatever it takes, Mr. Mayor.
July 17, 2008 at 3:51 pm
by Andrew Smith
Here’s the press release. It’s been endorsed by all the chairs and vice chairs, including Aaron Reardon, Snohomish Exec, who was previously against the measure.
July 17, 2008 at 3:24 pm
by Martin H. Duke
If the March fare increase is any indication, buying a three-month Puget Pass now (August-October) will allow you to dodge the October fare increase until November. Quoting from the previous post on the matter, crediting Seattlest:
According to the Metro rep we just got on the phone, you can either keep the old pass and pay an extra quarter each time you get on, or go down to the Second and Jackson office (201 S. Jackson) to pay the difference. (You’ll get a new pass.) Lucky holders of a three-month pass for the months January, February and March will not be liable for that extra quarter until their passes run out.
Metro can do whatever they want, so your mileage may vary. That was then, this was now, and they might not even approve the fare increase.
But I’m buying a three-month pass.
Comments Off
« Newer Posts — Older Posts »
|
