Comments on: East Link Update: Tunnel Possible, Surface Viable

By: Sound Transit committee names new East Link routing preferences | Realpolitiks Bellevue

Fri, 09 Apr 2010 04:17:13 +0000

[...] Seattle Transit Blog reports that B2M would reduce the gap to $185 million. Previous routing combinations that included downtown tunnels were expected to cost up to $500 million beyond the voter-approved ST2 budget. [...]

By: Breaking: ST Capital Committee Recommends B2M & C9T - Seattle Transit Blog

Breaking: ST Capital Committee Recommends B2M & C9T - Seattle Transit Blog — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 23:14:51 +0000

[...] ST Capital Committee Recommends B2M & C9T by Sherwin Lee As we predicted, the Sound Transit Capital Committee made a recommendation of B2 modified and C9T for the preferred [...]

By: kent

kent — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 06:35:41 +0000

Great point BSD, go on any WEEKDAY and you will see the point I am making. And if you are not aware, MAX also connects people who need to go both to and THROUGH Portland. You should go and see for yourself. Visiting successful systems is far more informative than reading Bernie’s data.

By: Nathanael

Nathanael — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 03:07:00 +0000

Sheesh. The planned route simply will not have serious effects on vehicular traffic.

Will it be disrupted *by* stop lights? Maybe. That would be a problem.

By: Nathanael

Nathanael — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 02:41:57 +0000

The Minneapolis line goes through the downtown core of Minneapolis, at grade (perpendicular to and intersecting with the main streets, which are Nicollet and Hennepin), with no problems. It stops in front of City Hall.

You clearly don’t know where the downtown core of Minneapolis is.

Bellevue will do fine with surface running.

By: Bellevue Soccer Dad

Bellevue Soccer Dad — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 01:12:51 +0000

Great point, kent, because on the WEEKEND there is so much rush hour traffic in Portland. NOT!

Portland is not a good example that translates to Bellevue because Eastlink will connect people who need to go both to and THROUGH Bellevue, so it must be FAST.

The data Bernie mentions is correct. If you look at the intersection delay data, many will be more than twice as long with at-grade trains. Those trains will be getting stuck in Bellevue’s traffic causing reliability problems for the ENTIRE train and traffic system.

By: Bernie

Bernie — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 22:03:07 +0000

No, I’m quoting from the Comprehensive Plan policies adopted by the Council in August 2008 (amendments to city codes and standards, other city policies and procedures, city capital investments and expectations of Sound Transit). It doesn’t get much more official than amending city codes.

Adding service to the 550 is a cost effective way to add capacity when and where it’s needed. It’s nice to note the one bright spot for ridership in this down economy is increased ridership on ST Express buses. Personally though the 550 means nothing to me since if I’m going into Seattle I catch the 255. It’s a much more direct route and drops me of right in the bus tunnel :-

By: Bernie

Bernie — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 21:54:47 +0000

If you watch the presentation at the study session Goran ran through the expected delays on a few routes. Even circuitous ones people don’t normally take. There really aren’t that many options through downtown Bellevue. One of the drawbacks I guess of “skipping” every other street on the county grid.

By: Gordon Werner

Gordon Werner — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 21:22:35 +0000

aren’t there other streets in Bellevue? I would imagine that anyone who couldn’t stand to wait an extra few seconds for the LRVs to go through an intersection could easily take another street.

By: Mike Orr

Mike Orr — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 19:55:28 +0000

Kent Shopper Shuttle? Is that a circulator I didn’t know about?

By: Jason Mitchell

Jason Mitchell — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 19:52:07 +0000

Lazarus, not to start a whole thing, but where are those Central Link numbers from? Last I saw were 16.75K average and 19K+ peak for February.

By: Mike Orr

Mike Orr — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 19:10:50 +0000

108th is the place to cruise. It’s the new Alki. :)

By: Ben Schiendelman

Ben Schiendelman — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 18:41:06 +0000

In other words, you’re talking about an unofficial document that predates actual traffic analysis anyway.

For having what’s basically a few extra buses strung together crossing some streets (oh no!).

Why didn’t you blow up like this when the 550 got more service? That crosses streets too! And, of course, removing the 550 when East Link opens will reduce congestion as well. ;)

By: Bernie

Bernie — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 18:14:27 +0000

That was done by the Bellevue Light Rail Best Practices Committee which visit systems around the country. Council memebers Davidson, Robertson and Balducci were all part of that committe which helped developed the Comprehensive Plan policies. With respect to downtown:

A light rail system should add new travel capacity within its own right-of-way, rather than replace existing travel lane capacity, in order to maximize speed and reliability for light rail while minimizing impacts to other modes.

Discussion: The intent of this policy is to ensure that the addition of a light rail system in Bellevue does not reduce the capacity of travel lanes on existing city arterials. This is especially critical in the downtown where the capacity of lanes for non-rail vehicle travel is already constrained.

By: Ben Schiendelman

Ben Schiendelman — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 18:12:04 +0000

Good point! :)

By: Ben Schiendelman

Ben Schiendelman — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 18:11:32 +0000

I’ve seen it done in Europe too – and it “can work quite well” when you have high storefront density in an already pedestrian-friendly area, but when you have so few people actually on the streets like Bellevue does, and so many more cars for them to compete with, it would probably kill what little pedestrian life that intersection has.

By: Ben Schiendelman

Ben Schiendelman — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 18:09:59 +0000

So, you’re talking about a group hired by B7 supporters to push their agenda. I’m talking about the two analyses done by the City and ST.

By: lazarus

lazarus — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 17:45:59 +0000

Actually, I’ve seen this done in Europe and it can work quite well. Basically the rail runs predominately at grade in the street, but when it encounters a particularly busy or problematic intersection it “porpoises” under the intersection. As long as the cut starts far enough back it has no impact on pedestrian flow at the intersection. Pedestrian flow mid-block is of course impacted, but nobody should be crossing mid-block anyhow (for example, even on MLK).

A variation on the design puts an underground station under the intersection. Pedestrians crossing the street then have the option of crossing the intersection by going down one level into the mezzanine level of the station and crossing under the street. Sometimes it is actually required that pedestrians cross in this manner.

By: Bernie

Bernie — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 17:29:33 +0000

Sparrman, van de Kamp and Sarkozy are (along with their staff) the professionals that came up with the numbers. I didn’t make them up and neither did the elected City Council.

By: kent

kent — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 17:14:05 +0000

Many of the fears regarding delays in DT Bellevue could easily be put to rest with a field trip to Portland.
Bernie – seriously, if you have not been on Max through DT Portland, you should take a weekend trip down and try it out. I am sure that traffic in Portland is =/> Bellevue. You will find no problem with delays. Really, a light rail train is like a couple of buses driving through the city back to back. These fears are ill founded IMHO.