Comments on: HOV 3+ And Transit Later, With Two Caveats http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/ Transit in the Greater Seattle Area Mon, 13 Feb 2012 12:33:50 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: eddiew http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-103808 eddiew Sun, 07 Feb 2010 09:11:08 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-103808 the three plus lane is only westbound and ends at Evergreen Point. WSDOT argues it would be unsafe at two-plus with the on ramp traffic merging through it. there is precedent for the Legislature to change three plus to two plus. that was led by then Senator Gary Nelson, R-21, later on the Snohomish County Council and now retired.
the three plus lane is only westbound and ends at Evergreen Point. WSDOT argues it would be unsafe at two-plus with the on ramp traffic merging through it.

there is precedent for the Legislature to change three plus to two plus. that was led by then Senator Gary Nelson, R-21, later on the Snohomish County Council and now retired.

]]> By: Bernie http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-103288 Bernie Fri, 05 Feb 2010 02:59:48 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-103288 <blockquote>WSDOT policy has set the HOV operations standard at 45 MPH, but I have yet to see them take action to maintain this speed. Think 405 SB during PM peak through Bellevue.</blockquote> Rodger that! It's usually faster in the non-HOV lanes through there. The other oxymoron are the traffic reports that you have to listen to to find out on any given day if the mainline or the "Express" Lanes on I-5 will save you time.

WSDOT policy has set the HOV operations standard at 45 MPH, but I have yet to see them take action to maintain this speed. Think 405 SB during PM peak through Bellevue.

Rodger that! It’s usually faster in the non-HOV lanes through there. The other oxymoron are the traffic reports that you have to listen to to find out on any given day if the mainline or the “Express” Lanes on I-5 will save you time.

]]> By: Bernie http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-103285 Bernie Fri, 05 Feb 2010 02:54:11 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-103285 I think it's very workable if they moved the focus of the 520 corridor work from Montlake to it's terminus. Instead of dumping cars onto I-5 for the insanely short shuffle to Mercer and 45th. Provide an alternate connection to downtown. Imagine how stupid it would be if you had to exit I-90 and get off at say James to get to SODO or the ferries. Same thing with the U District. Some of that is in the planning but a lot more emphasis I think needs to be done on how the connection to the express lanes are used. Perhaps there's a way to maintain the reversible "feature" of the express lanes and still have a 24/7 northbound route from 520 to 45th/50th? And, the express lanes need to switch to HOV 3+ <b>and</b> adopt the open to GP traffic off peak. I was originally opposed to the opening of the HOV lanes off peak but when you think about it it makes a ton of sense because lowers peak demand by shifting single occupancy vehicles to off peak.
I think it’s very workable if they moved the focus of the 520 corridor work from Montlake to it’s terminus. Instead of dumping cars onto I-5 for the insanely short shuffle to Mercer and 45th. Provide an alternate connection to downtown. Imagine how stupid it would be if you had to exit I-90 and get off at say James to get to SODO or the ferries. Same thing with the U District. Some of that is in the planning but a lot more emphasis I think needs to be done on how the connection to the express lanes are used. Perhaps there’s a way to maintain the reversible “feature” of the express lanes and still have a 24/7 northbound route from 520 to 45th/50th? And, the express lanes need to switch to HOV 3+ and adopt the open to GP traffic off peak. I was originally opposed to the opening of the HOV lanes off peak but when you think about it it makes a ton of sense because lowers peak demand by shifting single occupancy vehicles to off peak.

]]> By: Paul http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-102964 Paul Thu, 04 Feb 2010 03:27:09 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-102964 Someone had to tell the contractor what to build. And someone had to ensure the contractor built what they were supposed to build, the way it was supposed to be built.
Someone had to tell the contractor what to build. And someone had to ensure the contractor built what they were supposed to build, the way it was supposed to be built.

]]> By: jeff http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-102908 jeff Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:15:43 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-102908 You are stressing that we need to make it constitutionally possible to take that lane for transit without paying off WSDOT. I agree. But I fear that even if that is constitutionally possible it might not be politically possible. Unless the law reads that you, Ben Schiendelman, get to decide when to make it transit only then it will be a huge fight to do so. It is easier and better to take it now. Then we can spend our energy fighting other battles in the future.
You are stressing that we need to make it constitutionally possible to take that lane for transit without paying off WSDOT. I agree. But I fear that even if that is constitutionally possible it might not be politically possible. Unless the law reads that you, Ben Schiendelman, get to decide when to make it transit only then it will be a huge fight to do so. It is easier and better to take it now. Then we can spend our energy fighting other battles in the future.

]]> By: Brent http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-102900 Brent Wed, 03 Feb 2010 23:58:07 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-102900 http://www2.seattlepi.com/articles/414659.html Per this article, carpools would use HOT lanes for free, and SOVs would pay a toll to use them.
http://www2.seattlepi.com/articles/414659.html

Per this article, carpools would use HOT lanes for free, and SOVs would pay a toll to use them.

]]> By: Grahm http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-102865 Grahm Wed, 03 Feb 2010 22:30:40 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-102865 I wasn't necessarily concerned with what the restrictions to the HOV lanes are, but that the HOV restrictions are adjusted to ensure operating speeds in that lane average above 45 MPH. Is WSDOT going to say no tolled vehicles or raise the tolls high enough to ensure transit ins't bogged down in the HOV lane? I find it hard to believe WSDOT is going to walk away from some of that toll money (and the capitol investment for equipment) even if it means transit vehicles are slowed by tolled vehicle traffic.
I wasn’t necessarily concerned with what the restrictions to the HOV lanes are, but that the HOV restrictions are adjusted to ensure operating speeds in that lane average above 45 MPH. Is WSDOT going to say no tolled vehicles or raise the tolls high enough to ensure transit ins’t bogged down in the HOV lane? I find it hard to believe WSDOT is going to walk away from some of that toll money (and the capitol investment for equipment) even if it means transit vehicles are slowed by tolled vehicle traffic.

]]> By: Jason Mitchell http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-102864 Jason Mitchell Wed, 03 Feb 2010 22:29:23 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-102864 Thanks, Ben.
Thanks, Ben.

]]> By: Jonathan Dubman http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-102848 Jonathan Dubman Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:49:48 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-102848 The Willamette Transit Bridge (bus+rail+bike+ped, no cars) is for the <a href="http://trimet.org/pm/index.htm" rel="nofollow">Portland-Milwaukie Light Rail Project</a> which constructs a new line to the south.
The Willamette Transit Bridge (bus+rail+bike+ped, no cars) is for the Portland-Milwaukie Light Rail Project which constructs a new line to the south.

]]> By: Mike Orr http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-102830 Mike Orr Wed, 03 Feb 2010 20:42:53 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-102830 They're finally replacing the Steel Bridge bottleneck?
They’re finally replacing the Steel Bridge bottleneck?

]]> By: Ben Schiendelman http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-102827 Ben Schiendelman Wed, 03 Feb 2010 20:30:52 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-102827 Even just HOV 3+ doesn't congest when it's in the center lane. For now that's enough, and that's what's in the plan.
Even just HOV 3+ doesn’t congest when it’s in the center lane. For now that’s enough, and that’s what’s in the plan.

]]> By: Mike Orr http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-102822 Mike Orr Wed, 03 Feb 2010 20:03:27 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-102822 The advantage of the Evergreen Bridge is that it's already there. I expect there would be a lot of opposition to adding another bridge unless it's next to an existing one. More bridges would give the impression of paving over the lake, which would detract from the "natural" look that was the reason people bought their waterfront property in the first place.
The advantage of the Evergreen Bridge is that it’s already there. I expect there would be a lot of opposition to adding another bridge unless it’s next to an existing one. More bridges would give the impression of paving over the lake, which would detract from the “natural” look that was the reason people bought their waterfront property in the first place.

]]> By: Jim Cusick http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-102809 Jim Cusick Wed, 03 Feb 2010 19:11:05 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-102809 It was for show. It was a political decision at the last minute. I congratulate the project manager for not going overboard. Made it easier to retrofit.
It was for show. It was a political decision at the last minute. I congratulate the project manager for not going overboard. Made it easier to retrofit.

]]> By: Winston http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-102805 Winston Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:46:35 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-102805 Wow, that is a good point! WSDOT should make sure the bridge is engineered from the get-go handle LR on the north side of the bridge.
Wow, that is a good point! WSDOT should make sure the bridge is engineered from the get-go handle LR on the north side of the bridge.

]]> By: Winston http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-102803 Winston Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:43:44 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-102803 Yes, that's exactly what I mean - a dedicated right of way for buses across 520. I think as long as the HOV lanes can act as BRT corridors (maybe bus only during peak times?) then people can zip across to the East/West side quickly using public transit.
Yes, that’s exactly what I mean – a dedicated right of way for buses across 520. I think as long as the HOV lanes can act as BRT corridors (maybe bus only during peak times?) then people can zip across to the East/West side quickly using public transit.

]]> By: Ben Schiendelman http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-102747 Ben Schiendelman Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:50:31 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-102747 I think tunneling parallel to 45th, going elevated near U Village, and then dropping to at-grade (Rainier Valley style) on Sand Point for another stop at Children's would be a good plan. But I'd probably end it there - the NIMBYs who don't want Children's to be able to expand would likely preclude extending it further.
I think tunneling parallel to 45th, going elevated near U Village, and then dropping to at-grade (Rainier Valley style) on Sand Point for another stop at Children’s would be a good plan. But I’d probably end it there – the NIMBYs who don’t want Children’s to be able to expand would likely preclude extending it further.

]]> By: Ben Schiendelman http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-102744 Ben Schiendelman Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:47:39 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-102744 That seems like a small technical issue buried in a bad decision. There is no plan for light rail over 520.
That seems like a small technical issue buried in a bad decision. There is no plan for light rail over 520.

]]> By: Ben Schiendelman http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-102743 Ben Schiendelman Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:46:58 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-102743 We would, if we weren't having this huge battle over the footprint of the bridge. There are two endpoints here. UW is a natural endpoint, and that's where we're putting in HOV ramps. As there isn't really anything at 520, the flyer stop isn't necessary at all if we can implement service to replace it - we've needed a better connection there for a long time anyway.
We would, if we weren’t having this huge battle over the footprint of the bridge.

There are two endpoints here. UW is a natural endpoint, and that’s where we’re putting in HOV ramps. As there isn’t really anything at 520, the flyer stop isn’t necessary at all if we can implement service to replace it – we’ve needed a better connection there for a long time anyway.

]]> By: Ben Schiendelman http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-102740 Ben Schiendelman Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:45:04 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-102740 Brent, there is no precedent for HOV lanes being turned into GP lanes.
Brent, there is no precedent for HOV lanes being turned into GP lanes.

]]> By: Ben Schiendelman http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/hov-3-and-transit-later-with-two-caveats/#comment-102739 Ben Schiendelman Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:44:05 +0000 http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=12044#comment-102739 Jason: State ex. rel. O’Connor v. Slavin, 75 Wn. 2d. 554, 560 (1969) Referenced by: http://www.northwesthub.org/east-link-lawsuit
Jason: State ex. rel. O’Connor v. Slavin, 75 Wn. 2d. 554, 560 (1969)

Referenced by: http://www.northwesthub.org/east-link-lawsuit

]]>