Comments on: News Roundup: Votes, Polls, and Surveys

By: crk on bellevue ave

crk on bellevue ave — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 15:41:59 +0000

The online form works just fine. Did that for a burnt out bulb and they showed up within the week to replace it.

By: Andy Walker

Andy Walker — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:56:32 +0000

“Dignituh” ;)

By: Andy Walker

Andy Walker — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:54:28 +0000

I thought it was a swing bridge, but I am likely misremembering…

By: Ed R.

Ed R. — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 18:33:02 +0000

Makes sense to charge market rate. In some cases, of course, that would be close to zero. There are large empty area both north and west of the Federal Way Transit Center, so it’s clear there’s no demand for that land to be sed for something else. One might want to recoup the cost of building the FWTC, if not the land, but then you have the problem of commuters parking at nearby businesses.

Not only are there outlying areas not served by buses, there are also areas not quite so outlying that are not served by buses during the hours people commute. My vanpool leaves the Federal Way P&R at 6:30am, but the first southbound 174 of the day is usually too late for me to take from home to meet the vanpool.

By: Andreas

Andreas — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 07:31:16 +0000

Seattle, apparently unlike Vancouver, has an online form for reporting problem streetlights, and IIRC the phone number doesn’t lead to a voice mailbox. I assume someone has to sort through duplicate form submissions, but that wouldn’t be nearly as bad as dealing with actual people.

Plus, yeah, that’s her job, so…

By: Chad

Chad — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 06:58:41 +0000

What did Metro say about public data at that developer conference they had a few weeks ago? How can they promote third-party developers if they don’t make their data public?

By: alexjonlin

alexjonlin — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 05:29:36 +0000

…I don’t understand what the problem is, if it’s her job to take these calls.

By: alexjonlin

alexjonlin — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 05:22:07 +0000

I don’t know what I think about transit money on P&Rs, but at least charge a couple dollars to use them. Plenty of other agencies do it, and it’s still a hell of a lot cheaper than parking downtown.

By: Oran Viriyincy

Oran Viriyincy — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 03:52:36 +0000

Park & Rides serve primarily commuters and people going to special events. Most people will still drive a car to get groceries or a burger because it’s far more convenient than a bus than runs every 30-60 minutes and the destinations are too spread out. Bus service on most of the Eastside is poor and not as cost-effective compared to Seattle.

I’d love to see the suburbs retrofitted to be more transit friendly but until then park & rides will have to do.

I walk to the 255 and 257 and every time I go by an overfilled Brickyard and Kingsgate I’m glad I didn’t have to park & ride. Brickyard is undergoing an expansion by the way.

By: ericn

ericn — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 03:52:13 +0000

I agree, land use can be very different in the suburbs than it is near the city center. Some neighborhoods have no transit service at all, and others might only have one infrequent bus route.

It’s kind of a chicken-and-egg problem: transit isn’t worthwhile without at least some density, but it’s also difficult to create that density if each household has two or more cars. Park-and-rides are a good way to bridge that gap.

By: Anandakos

Anandakos — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 03:16:57 +0000

Suh, Lou’vlle is veuh much a Suth’n city. Please do not impugn it’s dignity!

By: Anandakos

Anandakos — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 03:15:07 +0000

Agreed. We can’t let the perfect be the enemy of the better than what’s now.

By: Anandakos

Anandakos — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 03:14:05 +0000

Yep. They were NP’s Canadian passenger line. The freight went down to Renton and Auburn yard on the east side ROW through Bellevue, but the passenger trains turned at Woodinville and came down the Burke-Gilman to about 11th NW. There was at one time a lift bridge that crossed the Ship Canal at an angle to feed into the line on the south side of the Canal that the city now owns.

By: Casey

Casey — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 03:03:03 +0000

I disagree. In Seattle you don’t need P&R’s because almost no matter where you live you are in walking distance of at least one, maybe more routes. But in the outlying areas, you need park and rides. Yes commuter routes serve some neighborhoods, but not all. I live on the 252 & 255 now, but I used to live where there was no bus service. I had to drive to a P&R. Bothell, Canyon Park, Lynnwood, Ash Way, Brickyard, Kingsgate all fill up. Some even with cars illegally parked just to catch the bus there.

I understand your argument for people leaving their cars at home, but there are just too many areas that have limited or no bus service at all. So we need these park and rides.

We need to spend money on P&R’s to increase the size of existing lots and build new ones for those who can’t just walk from their house to the bus stop. More parking spaces allows more riders and fewer cars on the freeways.

By: Kenneth Parker

Kenneth Parker — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 03:01:15 +0000

I think we should insist on P&Rs charging market rate if they get full. It would also make more sense if P&Rs were funded out of the road budget.

By: Tim V.

Tim V. — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 02:43:07 +0000

Don’t do this. My girlfriend takes calls in the city of Vancouver BC for street lights that are burnt out and she hates it when people do this. You would be suprised how many people call in a single burnt out light…she’ll calls from a dozen people about one light.

By: Casey

Casey — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 02:41:11 +0000

I know you know this, but to avoid confusion. 124 & 174 are seperate routes, even operated out of seperate bases. Except the two trip each direction of night owl service. Then in thaqt case only is it a linked route.

By: Bernie

Bernie — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 02:24:08 +0000

There’s a huge difference in the investment associated with a P&R. A one extreme you’ve got things like churches where the transit investment is a small rental. The next step up are out lying surface lots where the land isn’t overly expensive and is actually a pretty good investment. At the other extreme you’ve got mega dollar parking garages often on very valuable real estate. Redmond TC is an example of that. You end up increasing the transit subsidy per ride by at least 4X (at least until we charge for parking). And since these structures are usually in the center of an already congested area they tend to make peak traffic even worse. The South Bellevue East Link proposal is a prime example of just such a poor investment. As Matt points out, each of those expensive spots is only one round trip.

By: Matt

Matt — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 02:07:01 +0000

Except any in front of my house! It was burned out for two years, and the dark nights and stargazing were perfect… then a new bulb. Bummer.

By: Matt

Matt — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 02:05:17 +0000

Exactly… put in like 400 stalls and that’s what you have: a train load.