I see your rail data is from http://transit-safety.volpe.dot.gov/Data/samis/default.asp?ReportID=2 which it would be great to have as a link at your site instead of just embedded in the image. Where’s the urban driving data from? It would also be nice to have rates for biking, another commute option. :)

For light rail, the chart referenced above by Justin is simply wrong.

And here’s some good news, worth of high praise for Sound Transit: The Kinkisharyo light rail cars used on Central Link apparently have a Hubner energy absorbing bumper installed on each end of them, which provides some crash protection for anything that happens to be struck by the train.

You can read more about these bumpers by looking at files indexed by Google under [Kinkisharyo Hubner Seattle bumper] in particular,
http://www.hubner-usa.com/Company.pdf .

This same company Hubner manufactures the accordian like structure that characterizes the middle of Metro’s articulated buses.

As for the promises of the 1996 Sound Move election, that train has left the station. Some parts of the Sound Move “Regional Express” Plan are not yet under construction after 13 years of a 10 year plan.

A friend tells me that Sound Transit’s financial director reported to the Citizen Oversight Panel this morning that “April, 2009 sales-tax receipts are down so far that the $2.2 billion shortfall acknowledged publicly to date by Sound Transit for ST2 could become $3 billion, although he is hoping for only $2.6 to $2.8 billion.”

Furthermore, this whole section of the link looks and acts remarkably like the Yellow line of the Portland MAX. This line functions fast, reliably and in all of the years of me regularly riding it, I have yet to see or be in an LRV that experienced an accident between the LRV and cars. If it works down here, why doesn’t it work up there?

John, do we need to start linking to old email and comments here? Because you can look bad, fast.

For 2003, BTS reports 17 light rail fatalities at http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_02_33a.html and 1,476 light rail million passenger miles at http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_01_37.html.

The 17 fatalities do NOT include suicides, according to a footnote.

Dividing 1.476 BILLION (=1000 times a million) light rail passenger miles into 17 light rail fatalities yields 11.5 fatalities per billion passenger miles, a number which exceeds the fatality rate of approximately 8 shown for highway fatalities, which includes both urban and rural driving and pedestrians. The urban roads rate of fatalities for 2003 was 5.7, which means the light rail death causation rate was TWICE that of motor vehicles in 2003.

Your comment, “We trade off safety for cost all the time; as in the speed limit example, we trade off safety for convenience all the time, too” is exactly right.

Where we disagree is whether City of Seattle made the right trade off decision in issuing permits for Sound Transit to build a regional railroad with 18 grade crossings along the boulevard in question.

At this point, we have to wait and see what happens over the next few years.

John

You are focusing on the number of accidents with light rail in operation, while I am focusing on the nature of the accidents and the result on human life. Trains hitting cars, cyclists, and pedestrians will likely result in worse outcomes than cars hitting cyclists, pedestrians, and other cars.

It of course would have been possible to make MLK Jr Way a safer street than it was in the 1990s without laying a regional passenger railroad down the median.

We will know over the next year whether this boulevard becomes safer.

I think it’s quite reasonable to express concerns that at-grade portions of the system slow it down and make it more dangerous than it would be if grade-separated, while still supporting getting it built at all. I don’t think criticism necessarily constitutes an “attack”. I’m very glad the light rail system is finally getting built, I wish it were being built faster and better, and I’d like to improve it at the earliest opportunity.

I do think leaving personalities out of this, even in the case of a person who has a history of Protean arguments, and whose motivations are questionable, will lead to a more informative and useful debate. Ben, your exasperation with Mr. Niles is understandable, but you can accomplish more by sticking to critiques of his *arguments*–even if they are spurious. *Especially* when they are spurious.

I don’t think it’s overbuilt. Seattle’s rarity is what will make the system suck less than Portland/San Jose/Denver/Dallas/etc, and ultimately gain a greater percentage of riders.

PS I’m really liking Mike O’Brien of the canidates for that seat. It doesn’t hurt that he’s been very active in my neighborhood (Maple Leaf).

I am slightly concerned that he seems to be for protecting the sacred cow of the single-family Seattle neighborhood. Though I don’t get the impression his opponents are much better or that they’ve put as much thought into the matter as he has.

The choices became:

-Build it at grade.
-Don’t build it.

I’m really, really tired of having this discussion. We’re going to build more rail, and more of it is going to be at grade.

I find it hilarious that you’re attacking this section for being at-grade, but then attacking the system for being overbuilt at the same time!