Comments on: The Deep Bore Couldn’t Be Rail Later http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/ Transit in the Greater Seattle Area Mon, 13 Feb 2012 09:21:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Mike Orr http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77551 Mike Orr Fri, 30 Oct 2009 18:48:01 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77551 It may be easy enough to leave space for future elevators and stations. I don't know how much that would enlarge the tunnel cavity or add to the expense, but it might be doable. But even if it's possible to convert the tunnel to transit later, it's another question whether it'll be feasable. You'd have to move <i>all</i> cars out of the tunnel, unless the trains were only going to take one lane each direction. In the brave new future, car usage may dwindle to one lane's worth, but it won't dwindle to zero. There would still be some remaining cars the government would have to forcibly eject from the tunnel -- and that would be a big political fight. Unless, maybe 30 years out, I-5 traffic has shrunk so much that all cars could be moved to it without slowing anybody down. One nice thing about a 2nd Avenue transit tunnel is there'd be a perfect transfer point at University Street where there's already a 2nd Avenue entrance.
It may be easy enough to leave space for future elevators and stations. I don’t know how much that would enlarge the tunnel cavity or add to the expense, but it might be doable.

But even if it’s possible to convert the tunnel to transit later, it’s another question whether it’ll be feasable. You’d have to move all cars out of the tunnel, unless the trains were only going to take one lane each direction. In the brave new future, car usage may dwindle to one lane’s worth, but it won’t dwindle to zero. There would still be some remaining cars the government would have to forcibly eject from the tunnel — and that would be a big political fight. Unless, maybe 30 years out, I-5 traffic has shrunk so much that all cars could be moved to it without slowing anybody down.

One nice thing about a 2nd Avenue transit tunnel is there’d be a perfect transfer point at University Street where there’s already a 2nd Avenue entrance.

]]> By: Mike Orr http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77546 Mike Orr Fri, 30 Oct 2009 18:31:12 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77546 NYC subways make several downtown stops. So does the PATH train, sort of. The suburban railroads make only one downtown stop, but that's akin to Sounder.
NYC subways make several downtown stops. So does the PATH train, sort of. The suburban railroads make only one downtown stop, but that’s akin to Sounder.

]]> By: Mike http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77367 Mike Thu, 29 Oct 2009 21:01:46 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77367 The Hong Kong MTR subway system integrates deep-bore station entrances into existing buildings, then uses high speed escalators to move people between street level and the multiple platform levels.
The Hong Kong MTR subway system integrates deep-bore station entrances into existing buildings, then uses high speed escalators to move people between street level and the multiple platform levels.

]]> By: Douglas Tooley http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77365 Douglas Tooley Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:11:35 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77365 Good tangent. Small point, but how close is the south portal to King Street Station? Transit hubs at both south and north downtown, connecting to I-90 and 520, would be an idea worth keeping as a permanent conceptual balloon. Especially if you are a bus rapid transit proponent! :-)
Good tangent. Small point, but how close is the south portal to King Street Station? Transit hubs at both south and north downtown, connecting to I-90 and 520, would be an idea worth keeping as a permanent conceptual balloon.

Especially if you are a bus rapid transit proponent!

:-)

]]> By: lazarus http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77296 lazarus Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:10:50 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77296 Ben, It's not a "new highway." It's a replacement to an existing highway. It's a completely different thing. The overall functionality of the highway as a DBT hardly changes -- except that trips terminating in DT are less well served and pass-through trips will now be paying a toll. Both of these are good for transit.
Ben,

It’s not a “new highway.” It’s a replacement to an existing highway. It’s a completely different thing.

The overall functionality of the highway as a DBT hardly changes — except that trips terminating in DT are less well served and pass-through trips will now be paying a toll. Both of these are good for transit.

]]> By: Mike Skehan http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77259 Mike Skehan Thu, 29 Oct 2009 09:46:39 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77259 Chris and Ben. This thread is about done, so I won't belabor the point I was making, except to say this would be an interesting thread by itself sometime in the future. Link to Northgate is approved and will be built. Extensions north will happen. That said, ridership will be the determining factor when deciding frequency of trains and size of consists. The DSTT has an enormous capacity for riders when the buses leave it. That capacity should be fully utilized to the best advantage in moving riders through the system. I look forward to more interesting discussions... someday.
Chris and Ben. This thread is about done, so I won’t belabor the point I was making, except to say this would be an interesting thread by itself sometime in the future.
Link to Northgate is approved and will be built. Extensions north will happen. That said, ridership will be the determining factor when deciding frequency of trains and size of consists. The DSTT has an enormous capacity for riders when the buses leave it. That capacity should be fully utilized to the best advantage in moving riders through the system.
I look forward to more interesting discussions… someday.

]]> By: Nathanael http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77236 Nathanael Thu, 29 Oct 2009 06:57:03 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77236 Isn't the deep bore tunnel for rushing cars and trucks *PAST* downtown? As such, the rail replacement would be a freight rail, and possibly express passenger train, line designed to rush containers and people *PAST* downtown. Perhaps if that were done the Great Northern Tunnel could be converted to local transit....
Isn’t the deep bore tunnel for rushing cars and trucks *PAST* downtown?

As such, the rail replacement would be a freight rail, and possibly express passenger train, line designed to rush containers and people *PAST* downtown.

Perhaps if that were done the Great Northern Tunnel could be converted to local transit….

]]> By: Ben Schiendelman http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77135 Ben Schiendelman Thu, 29 Oct 2009 04:13:35 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77135 Michael, there are no emergency access or ventilation points that I'm aware of planned for downtown. If you can show me where these are on a plan, please do, but I have not seen any plan for them. You can meet both requirements with chambers in the tunnel itself.
Michael, there are no emergency access or ventilation points that I’m aware of planned for downtown. If you can show me where these are on a plan, please do, but I have not seen any plan for them. You can meet both requirements with chambers in the tunnel itself.

]]> By: Ben Schiendelman http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77133 Ben Schiendelman Thu, 29 Oct 2009 04:10:25 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77133 Not providing a multi-billion-dollar roadway when state law says we have to reduce our VMT is hardly sabotage.
Not providing a multi-billion-dollar roadway when state law says we have to reduce our VMT is hardly sabotage.

]]> By: Kevin Futhey http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77091 Kevin Futhey Thu, 29 Oct 2009 02:37:45 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77091 I want to address the claim that those of us who oppose the deep bore tunnel are "sabotaging" roads and car-based transit. You want to talk sabotage? The sabotage already took place, and it was subsidized freeways and cars that did it. I'd like to undo the decades of car-culture sabotage that has wrecked the environment, cities, the countryside, and our health. We simply should not dedicate our limited resources to massive new projects that continue a failed policy.
I want to address the claim that those of us who oppose the deep bore tunnel are “sabotaging” roads and car-based transit.

You want to talk sabotage?

The sabotage already took place, and it was subsidized freeways and cars that did it. I’d like to undo the decades of car-culture sabotage that has wrecked the environment, cities, the countryside, and our health.

We simply should not dedicate our limited resources to massive new projects that continue a failed policy.

]]> By: Bernie http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77057 Bernie Wed, 28 Oct 2009 23:55:33 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77057 Emergency egress will most likely be a parallel escape tunnel. 200' flights of stairs certainly wouldn't cut it. Elevators aren't practical because of cost and the likelyhood that in an emergency the power might be out. I would except the same arrangement as if this were going under a body of water. Ventilation can be provided by a pressure differential from one end to the other.
Emergency egress will most likely be a parallel escape tunnel. 200′ flights of stairs certainly wouldn’t cut it. Elevators aren’t practical because of cost and the likelyhood that in an emergency the power might be out. I would except the same arrangement as if this were going under a body of water. Ventilation can be provided by a pressure differential from one end to the other.

]]> By: Mickymse http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77053 Mickymse Wed, 28 Oct 2009 23:45:35 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77053 You have to provide emergency egress from then DBT at a few points through Downtown. You also need ventilation. So, it's not like there will be no access built between the tunnel and Downtown. The question really is what would it cost to incorporate transit stops inside the tunnel, and to add high-capacity elevators at those points. If we are going to build the DBT, what would it cost to make this tunnel usable for transit (probably bus) connections to Downtown. In particular, would it increase transit use by maintaing Downtown <i>transit</i> connections while eliminating vehicle connections?
You have to provide emergency egress from then DBT at a few points through Downtown. You also need ventilation.

So, it’s not like there will be no access built between the tunnel and Downtown.

The question really is what would it cost to incorporate transit stops inside the tunnel, and to add high-capacity elevators at those points.

If we are going to build the DBT, what would it cost to make this tunnel usable for transit (probably bus) connections to Downtown. In particular, would it increase transit use by maintaing Downtown transit connections while eliminating vehicle connections?

]]> By: Mickymse http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77050 Mickymse Wed, 28 Oct 2009 23:37:58 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77050 Tunnel supporters can't have it both ways. They can't argue that the tunnel is a "done deal" because everyone has voted on it and appropriate money... but then turn around and say that Seattle is not on the hook for cost overruns, which are a part of that legislative deal. And, lazarus, legislators have been very clear that they will not provide more money to Seattle, period. Illegal or not, they will find a way to leave us stuck with the bill. And, at least for the moment, our Senators have absolutely no interest in bringing federal monies into the equation on this.
Tunnel supporters can’t have it both ways.

They can’t argue that the tunnel is a “done deal” because everyone has voted on it and appropriate money… but then turn around and say that Seattle is not on the hook for cost overruns, which are a part of that legislative deal.

And, lazarus, legislators have been very clear that they will not provide more money to Seattle, period. Illegal or not, they will find a way to leave us stuck with the bill. And, at least for the moment, our Senators have absolutely no interest in bringing federal monies into the equation on this.

]]> By: Bernie http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77039 Bernie Wed, 28 Oct 2009 23:00:00 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77039 Trying to make transit look good by deliberately sabotaging roads is a bad thing. Trains are never going to get people everywhere and surface transit is going to be hurt worse than the evil automobile and truck freight you'd like to stick it to. Individual drivers can vary there route and time to avoid the worse backups. Surface transit can't and it will be further impacted whenever it has to merge back into traffic. Soon the congestion will reach a point where people don't want to shop or go to shows downtown. Businesses will move to places with better mobility and Seattle will lose both tax revenue and see reduced demand (potential ridership).
Trying to make transit look good by deliberately sabotaging roads is a bad thing. Trains are never going to get people everywhere and surface transit is going to be hurt worse than the evil automobile and truck freight you’d like to stick it to. Individual drivers can vary there route and time to avoid the worse backups. Surface transit can’t and it will be further impacted whenever it has to merge back into traffic.

Soon the congestion will reach a point where people don’t want to shop or go to shows downtown. Businesses will move to places with better mobility and Seattle will lose both tax revenue and see reduced demand (potential ridership).

]]> By: Ben Schiendelman http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77036 Ben Schiendelman Wed, 28 Oct 2009 22:27:02 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77036 The DSTT will eventually run 2 minute headways - that's in the Sound Transit long range plan. You really can't wedge more service in there reliably.
The DSTT will eventually run 2 minute headways – that’s in the Sound Transit long range plan. You really can’t wedge more service in there reliably.

]]> By: Ben Schiendelman http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77035 Ben Schiendelman Wed, 28 Oct 2009 22:25:22 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77035 Oh, we don't want express. Adding four minutes to the trip stopping downtown isn't really the issue. The issue is whether that's more reliable than driving - and with the tunnel, driving reliability will go up too much. And yeah, that's a bad thing.
Oh, we don’t want express. Adding four minutes to the trip stopping downtown isn’t really the issue. The issue is whether that’s more reliable than driving – and with the tunnel, driving reliability will go up too much.

And yeah, that’s a bad thing.

]]> By: Ben Schiendelman http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77033 Ben Schiendelman Wed, 28 Oct 2009 22:23:29 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77033 I think you're missing his point. We'd never, ever, ever, ever get a dime of FTA money for a line that skipped our employment core.
I think you’re missing his point. We’d never, ever, ever, ever get a dime of FTA money for a line that skipped our employment core.

]]> By: Ben Schiendelman http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77032 Ben Schiendelman Wed, 28 Oct 2009 22:22:32 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77032 The fact that you're trying to compare transfers to get into downtown *at all* (where we have this whole post about how southbound transfers at Montlake would cause crush loads already) to transfers in Manhattan just points out how misleading you're being.
The fact that you’re trying to compare transfers to get into downtown *at all* (where we have this whole post about how southbound transfers at Montlake would cause crush loads already) to transfers in Manhattan just points out how misleading you’re being.

]]> By: Ben Schiendelman http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77029 Ben Schiendelman Wed, 28 Oct 2009 22:20:23 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77029 If you really think pain doesn't drive transit ridership, I have a bridge in Kansas to sell you. Remember the I-5 construction work that spiked Sounder ridership?
If you really think pain doesn’t drive transit ridership, I have a bridge in Kansas to sell you.

Remember the I-5 construction work that spiked Sounder ridership?

]]> By: Chris Stefan http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/27/the-deep-bore-couldnt-be-rail-later/#comment-77028 Chris Stefan Wed, 28 Oct 2009 22:07:11 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=9152#comment-77028 Except for near the portals there shouldn't be a real problem with conflicts between the Deep Bore Tunnel and any transit tunnels. The Deep Bore Tunnel is, well, deep. Any transit tunnel will be closer to the surface.
Except for near the portals there shouldn’t be a real problem with conflicts between the Deep Bore Tunnel and any transit tunnels. The Deep Bore Tunnel is, well, deep. Any transit tunnel will be closer to the surface.

]]>