Comments on: News Roundup

By: McGinn for Mayor - Seattle Transit Blog

McGinn for Mayor - Seattle Transit Blog — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 13:39:16 +0000

[...] about fighting for more bus service or unwarranted attacks on streetcars. Furthermore, he has accepted contributions from anti-transit sources like John Stanton. It’s especially difficult to tell how a [...]

By: poncho

poncho — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 06:16:26 +0000

For anyone going to the MAX Green Line opening on Saturday…

Be sure to pick up the free Portland Tribune this week. There is an 80 PAGE guide to the Green Line and lists the events going on at the grand opening. The Portland Tribune is a weekly paper and just came out today and is available until next Wednesday.

By: Martin H. Duke

Martin H. Duke — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 22:12:39 +0000

Metro had a pool of hours in the Southeast with which to maintain existing service and create new service. They took the SLUT hours right off the top.

By: Zed

Zed — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 20:39:38 +0000

My point is that the changes to bus service in southeast Seattle would have been the same whether or not some of the freed-up hours were diverted to the streetcar. There was never a decision to scrap feeder service to Link in favor of the streetcar and it is not fair to say that the streetcar caused Metro to reduce service in southeast Seattle because it is simply not true. There could be a great feeder service to Link if people in the south-end weren’t so scared of having their bus route changed or having to, gasp, transfer.

By: Mike Orr

Mike Orr — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 19:19:46 +0000

A lot of topics here. My main interest is the long-term impact of adding streetcars vs doing something else. I agree with most of the STB about adding light rail: the “pre-metro” configuration (stops every 1+ miles, mostly grade-separated) gives Seattle a transit option that’s been missing: something faster than buses, frequent, and making trips feasable that weren’t before (e.g., southeast Seattle to Sea-Tac without transfering at Southcenter, Spokane Street, or Downtown). That justifies the capital costs to me, and I’m swayed by Ben’s argument that LR will become relatively cheaper compared to buses as gas prices rise.

Streetcars are a different ballgame, and I’m still undecided about them. My initial reaction is negative because I’ve heard from several places that they’re more expensive to operate than buses (both trolley and diesel). If Zed is right that a streetcar is $160/hr vs $130 for trolleybus, then maybe the difference is insignificant and the issue is more the route than the mode (i.e., is this the most-needed route). The higher capacity of streetcars is only a factor where such high demand is likely.

My main concern about the SLUT is not the past (how many bus expansions it displaced) but what the impact of more streetcars would be. In that I’m still not sure if I can agree with the STB majority (more streetcars, and streetcars over buses), hence my question.

Zed: “The 2005 operating agreement between the city and Metro called for Metro to allocate to the streetcar some of the additional hours already being allocated to Seattle by Metro for expansion of bus service.” That’s what I’m taking about. It’s not disingenuous to point out that these hours were slated for bus expansion but were diverted to the SLUT. No matter which government agency caused the change (and it was clearly the city rather than Metro), the net result to users/taxpayers is the same: a streetcar in SLU (of minor benefit) and less feeder expansions to Link (which would have really showed people what LR+feeders can do for a region).

By: Mickymse

Mickymse — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 17:12:00 +0000

???

The reduction of hours in southeast Seattle as routes are reconfigured to serve Link was supposed to result in some number being used to either create new feeder routes to Link or increased frequency on existing routes.

If a large number of those hours now get applied to the streetcar, how is it “being painted that way for a political purpose”? That’s been the understanding of many folks for quite some time…

By: Mickymse

Mickymse — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 17:07:57 +0000

This is why I am a supporter of streetcar as a mode, but have been opposed to much of the planning for a network in Seattle. It’s being used to push development goals of the city and not transportation goals. It’s particularly annoying when City folks push the proposed streetcar lines as a response to the failed monorail project — which was about rapid, grade-separated conduct from one neighborhood to another and not transit within neighborhood business districts.

By: Mickymse

Mickymse — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 17:02:36 +0000

Yeah, I bash Ben often about the streetcar taking hours we need for buses right now… but a good comparison of this is to look at the initial costs per passenger of running Sounder trains vs. what it costs per passenger now with North and South operating and multiple trains on each side of Seattle. There’s a pretty HUGE difference, as one might expect.

By: Bernie

Bernie — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:33:47 +0000

I have no idea what they’re doing down there. Lakewood Station? Lakewood Transit Center?

No, this was out on Custer. It was a real piss ant flagging job. It was the first time I’d seen an ST cop but it’s not unusual to see overtime cops hired to do this duty. I guess they were cheaper than Pierce County Sheriffs. Lakewood and Pierce County have been a bit odd for decades with the “Pumpkin patrol”.

By: Oran

Oran — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:18:00 +0000

They are a bona fide police department comprised of sheriff’s deputies, sergeants, detectives, and officers, real cops with real guns and police powers. Sound Transit contracts with the King County Sheriff for their services. The Seattle Times ran a story about them.

I have no idea what they’re doing down there. Lakewood Station? Lakewood Transit Center? I don’t think ST Police primarily deals with bank robberies although they might assist local police if the suspect attempts to escape via transit.

By: Bernie

Bernie — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 08:14:57 +0000

As a fairly avid cyclist I don’t see this 7′ wide cycle track on one side of the road as a good idea at all. Parallel alternatives to heavy traffic roads is the best. Center cycle lanes sound weird but they work great on Ravenna. As a cyclist (and having many many motorcycle miles) visibility is the primary concern. Hidden by parked cars looks like a disaster.

By: Bernie

Bernie — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 07:44:33 +0000

What exactly are the ST Police? I saw ST Police doing traffic control for some piss ant repaving project down in Lakewood a couple of weeks ago. I’m pretty sure ST had nothing to do with the funding. Do these “cops” carry guns? Do they drop traffic control if there’s a bank robbery? I guess my question is are they police officers or just public security guards or something in between? And why are they doing traffic control for weekend re-striping of turn lanes?

By: Oran

Oran — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 07:24:05 +0000

I’ve seen the Sound Transit Police enforce HOV restrictions at the Totem Lake Freeway Station.

By: Oran

Oran — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 07:22:32 +0000

Yeah, I live around there. If you’re going to SB 405 just continue down 116th and bear left across 124th on to 405. They gave I-405 traffic 2 turn lanes! Only one lane for right and thru traffic. My 255 usually gets stuck at that light.

But I suggest going up 132nd, left on 160th and getting on 405 by Brickyard P&R. It’s more direct and shorter.

By: Bernie

Bernie — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 06:41:04 +0000

Zed,
You are correct. I had thought that WSDOT had changed virtual all HOV lanes to allow SOV use 7PM to 5AM. It appears the HOV rules are about as convoluted as Metro pay as you enter, pay as you leave except after 7 and on Tuesdays if you have a Royal Fizbin. I was initially opposed to opening HOV access evenings and early AM but now I realize it makes a lot of sense. Some access may have safety concerns that warrant transit only and I can see that being restricted to 24 hours a day but if it’s HOV access then off peak it should be open. Why would SR-16 be 24 hour restricted and not 520? If anything I would thing the reverse since 520 is on the outside and creates hazardous merge conditions.

By: Zed

Zed — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 06:34:57 +0000

I didn’t mention Transit Now in my comment, did I?

The bus hour reduction due to Link would have happened with or without the streetcar. The streetcar being operated with those hours did not cause a reduction of hours in southeast Seattle. Which is why I think it is disingenuous to blame the streetcar for a (perceived) reduction in bus service in southeast Seattle, it is obviously being painted that way for a political purpose.

Now, in a fair world, there would be a reduction in bus hours in southeast Seattle due to Link coming online and those hours would be redistributed evenly to the rest of the city. So, if anything, people in north or west Seattle should be complaining about the streetcar taking service hours from them.

By: Jojo

Jojo — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 05:53:34 +0000

Hmmm that’s what I thought..but I just did a trip planner on sound transit’s website and the fare said $3.00. Will the second driver accept your two-zone transfer from the first leg? Or will they want an extra 50 cents?

By: eldan

eldan — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 05:52:14 +0000

Absolutely. But I think this points to a general flaw with separating lanes of road and pretending that’s equivalent to building a railway: drivers *hate* seeing bits of road that they technically can use but are not allowed to. This lady isn’t some outlier – there will be continuous pressure to open those HOV lanes up to all road users, and it only takes one Rossi term for it to happen.

By: Zed

Zed — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 05:51:24 +0000

When ST built the direct-access ramps near my house at the Eastgate P&R, they promised during the public comment period that the ramps would be for buses only. Then, after the ramps were nearly complete, they changed their mind and decided to allow HOV access. Now, from my observations, about half the cars using the ramps are cheating SOVs. It’s fun to stand there when the State Troopers are doing enforcement and watch all the drivers slam on their brakes and swerve back onto the roadway when they spot the police. I even saw one woman do a u-turn on the ramp and head back to 142nd when she spotted the trooper half-way down the ramp.

By: Zed

Zed — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 05:45:23 +0000

Last time I looked the HOV lanes on I-5 were restricted 24 hours. In order to use the HOV ramp an SOV would have to get in the HOV lane, which would be illegal.