Comments on: Lessons from DC Metro and BART

By: Andrea

Andrea — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 06:09:48 +0000

As a visitor to both Washington and San Francisco – one right after the other on the same trip, I can say that the DC Metro captured my heart. It is convenient for getting around town on, has cohesive and restful stations – my only beef was the sparse weekend frequencies. I think that the DC metro supports TOD lifestyles much better than most regional suburban-oriented lines which often must be paired with park’n'rides (ie MAX in Portland). BART was fine – definitely convenient for getting in from the airport on (much appreciated), but that was about it. As a visitor the San Francisco area, other than my exploratory trip to Berkley, I only used it to go to the airport. Since my visit to San Francisco was to the central city I used the articulated trolley buses to get around.

I think ridership potential and the benefits of mass transit investment are higher in more densely urbanized areas.

By: TrainsinTokyo

TrainsinTokyo — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 02:55:50 +0000

Japanese trains are fairly expensive

Not really. The base fare for the Tokyo Metro subway is 160 yen, and that will take you as far as 6 km; compare that to New York’s $2 fare regardless of distance or BART’s $1.50 minimum fare. Intracity transit by rail is comparatively cheap in Japan; intercity transit is more expensive per kilometer,

extraordinarily crowded

Only in Tokyo will you find trains pushing 200% of capacity, and even then only at certain times and only on certain segements. Most other major cities have 100-130% crowding on inbound trains on major lines during the morning peak.

By: John Thacker

John Thacker — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 22:11:54 +0000

I believe that Philly’s light and commuter rail systems (PATCO and SEPTA) also do around 60%, but those (together with the aforementioned NYC, BART, and DC Metro) are the best in the country by far for municipal systems. Obviously the Northeast Corridor does better, as intercity rail.

By: Andrew Smith

Andrew Smith — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 10:47:22 +0000

BRT is being put on Geary, I don’t know how exactly they are going to improve service on top of the 38 route, but anytihng is an improvement.

By: Andrew Smith

Andrew Smith — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 09:23:35 +0000

You’re definitely right about Tacoma and Everett. Without some additional taxing authority, I don’t think ST3 could be on the ballot maybe 2024 or 2028.

By: Bernie

Bernie — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 09:04:31 +0000

Born in 1958 I expect to be free of transit concerns by 2080. Maybe I should be less pessimistic and more forward thinking. If only my grandfather had foreseen the need for carbon fiber buggy whips we could have energy independence today ;-)

By: Amitabha Mukhopadhyay

Amitabha Mukhopadhyay — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 08:23:19 +0000

Both the systems are good enough but they are not futuristic enough. The future system will be more ecofriendly consuming very little energy and very fast and very sleek. To get the ultimate in transportation please visit the site. http://www.eloquentbooks.com/MegalopolisOne2080AD.html

By: Chris Stefan

Chris Stefan — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 07:13:41 +0000

I have no real idea of the feasibility of a bridge. Certainly one could be built to clear ship traffic, similarly a drawspan could be built. I know the SMP was planning to use a bridge across the canal. I’m not sure how much delay a drawspan would introduce into Link operations. I assume that would be one of the things that would need to be studied.

By: eddiew

eddiew — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 05:28:39 +0000

ST has a very large district. Each of its three counties are regional in size. Together, the three counties of TriMet are one-half the size of King County alone. the governance has a lot to do with ST’s system becoming BART-like. They intended wide stop spacing and chose rare 1500 volt overhead for that purpose. ST Link LRT will a lite-Metro between South McClellan Street and Northgate; that is the key segment. It has less grade separation along MLK Jr. Way South. The East alignment is yet to be determined. ST2 will probably not reach Tacoma and Everett. Other modes already serve the intercity function. Will there be an ST3? ST2 is still a long ways off. How will transit mobility be improved within Tacoma and Everett? Such centers will grow again with global warming and higher petro prices.

By: RK

RK — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 02:19:27 +0000

I totally agree that’s what we want and need, but I’m just not sure if it is going to happen, or if so how long.

By: RK

RK — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 02:18:20 +0000

A bridge would not work, because ships need to pass through the canal. Trains getting stopped at a draw bridge would defeat the point, and a a bridge high enough to avoid this would be way too big.

By: alexjonlin

alexjonlin — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 02:12:12 +0000

Well Northgate is right along I-5, downtown Mountlake Terrace is about 2 blocks from I-5, the downtown Lynnwood plan has 20 story buildings right around Lynnwood TC next to I-5, Alderwood is next to I-5, and many P&Rs are next to I-5 between there and Everett. Once it gets to Everett I would like to see it go underground through downtown Everett after Everett station, and then continue either on the surface MLK-style or elevated up to Everett CC.

By: alexjonlin

alexjonlin — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 02:09:09 +0000

No, the people at ST are pretty good at estimating ridership, so doing that would just add extra costs. And yes, the new downtown tunnel will be expensive, but it will definitely have great long-term benefits, like an ST4 or 5 line along Aurora. I would have the Ballard line be underground from U Dist-Ballard-across the ship canal, then elevated along 15th until before Uptown, where it would go underground, and stop at Uptown, Seattle Center, and Belltown. Then it would go in a tunnel either under 2nd or under the DSTT, before going over the West Seattle Bridge and going in a tunnel with stops at Avalon and Alaska then popping up and continuing down California until Burien or so.

By: Chris Stefan

Chris Stefan — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 02:07:41 +0000

I don’t know a tunnel would be necessary for crossing the Ship Canal. Assuming an at-grade or elevated alignment a bridge would work too.

On the other hand I suspect Ballard would demand a tunnel for any alignments West of 15th. Similarly a tunnel is probably the only politically viable option on 45th East of Stone Way.

Building in Seattle isn’t going to be cheap, but it will have good ridership compared to the rest of the system. Again with sub-area equity it means if the other sub-areas are getting something expensive in ST3 there will be money to build something expensive in North King.

By: Andrew Smith

Andrew Smith — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 02:03:55 +0000

There are tons of photos of the machines on flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=muni%20ticket%20machine&w=all&s=int

Some in the tunnel and some outside:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jym/436191953/

By: Andrew Smith

Andrew Smith — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 02:02:12 +0000

You’re totally right about this. One of the things I’ve learned writing this blog is that the decision makers on transportation generally want to take the public’s input, and are interested in what the people have to say.

However, our state legislature on the other hand…

By: Andrew Smith

Andrew Smith — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 02:00:08 +0000

I assure you they exist, here’s a photo:
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1013/1475315830_248d8d6aa9.jpg

here’s an article about them:
http://sfist.com/2007/10/03/if_youre_unluck.php

By: Chris Stefan

Chris Stefan — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 01:54:16 +0000

The good news is due to sub-area equity something is going to need to be built in North King if Link is extended to Everett, Redmond, Issaquah, Tacoma, etc.

I don’t believe all of the Sound Move and ST2 taxing authority will be needed to pay for O&M and bond servicing once the ST2 projects are complete. So even without additional revenue sources there still will be money for adding to the system. Though I suspect getting voter approval for further expansion is going to get easier not harder (there is the small problem of getting new tax authority though).

By: Christof Spieler

Christof Spieler — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 01:38:14 +0000

That is one of the big problems with regional planning — political pragmatism ends up driving a lot of decisions. That happens everywhere. But good transit planning, with a clear vision clearly articulated, can help. And sometimes (often) the public have to prod for good planning and articulate a vision themselves.

By: RK

RK — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 01:28:39 +0000

Maybe the most realistic plan, ultimately, would be to build as many streetcar lines as possible, and then later build the dedicated ROW and longer platforms for the most popular.