Did anyone go to this Viaduct open house last Tuesday?
UPDATE 11:44 AM: West Seattle Blog was kind enough to post a link to their coverage. It looks like there are a lot of conspiracy theories out there.
Happy Birthday to Us
This post originally appeared on Orphan Road.
Orphan Road turns one year old today. Thanks for everyone who’s read and contributed and blogged and commented and made the site such a pleasure to read and write. More to come in year two!
P.S.: Here’s my first post from a year ago, on the surface-transit option for the viaduct.
Barnett on Streetcar, and Transit to Marysville?
Erica Barnett, who apparently writes articles when she’s not making fun of Obama supporters, has a bizarre argument in this article. She starts by mentioning the streetcar proposal and the latest Sound Transit workshop. Okay, but then she busts into this:
[F]or those hoping Sound Transit will provide a panacea for the region’s out-of-control sprawl and growth-management woes, the latest proposal from the agency includes some sobering information.
…
In a nutshell: Growth management—which calls for concentrating growth in areas that are well served by transit, encouraging people to live close to where they work, and discouraging or banning new sprawl that promotes driving and harms the environment—isn’t working. Not only is it not working, the region is moving in the wrong direction. (Transit, in the absence of policies disincentivizing driving, isn’t “working” either—according to the US Department of Energy, vehicle miles driven could increase by 59 percent over 2005 levels by 2030—but that’s another column.) According to data included in Sound Transit’s preliminary “menu” of proposals for the ballot, the biggest growth is expected in places like Marysville and far Southeast Pierce County—places that won’t be served by new transit at all. Meanwhile, most of the job growth will be in places like Seattle, Bellevue, and Redmond. That means more trips—more long trips—in and out of the major urban centers from and to the sprawling, transitless suburbs.
First, she misunderstood the point about the Marysville argument. That was pointing out the importance of building transit, not the opposite. According to the Puget Sound Research Council’s models, most of the trips go through the main corridors that would be well served by high-capacity transit after ST2.
Second, Marysville is not in the Sound Transit district. That’s both good and bad; good because we don’t have the automatic no voters out there bringing propositionss down, but bad because it does not let new growth out there become transit-oriented.
I do agree with Barnett on the importance of growth boundaries with some teeth. As Martin showed this morning, New York was successful with transit by forcing the development into areas served by mass-transit. Here we need to do the same: build loads of real mass transit, and force new development there and there only.
I wonder what the chances are.
Gregoire signs law for new ferries
Next year, look for 3 new Washington State Ferries, one like the 50-car Steilacoom II and other two will be similar to the Steel Electrics…..The catch? No more than 100 cars and must be built in Washington State and will only be used on the Port Towsend – Keystone route.
State Transportation Secretary Paula Hammond has said a request for proposals from ship builders will go out Friday with bids due back within 30 days. Bidders must provide cost estimates for building between one and three vessels.
The new 50-car boat will be in service on the PT – Keystone route until sea trials are completed on the first actual (bigger boat) replacement for the Port Townsend – Keystone route. The Steilacoom II will return back to it’s normal route. The second big boat will serve the Port Townsend – Keystone route and the 50-car boat will then move to the Point Defiance route.
Still no official word on the three new 144-car ferries and their status.
More information is available on the Everett Herald.
http://heraldnet.com/article/20080214/NEWS01/579870067&news01ad=1#Gregoire.signs.law.for.new.ferries
National Transportation Planning
Megan McArdle of The Atlantic has an interesting, very wonky podcast about transportation planning in America, where she interviews her father, who happens to have been on the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission. I hope to digest their report sometime soon.
It’s just chock full of information, so take the hour to listen. Some interesting tidbits, including a follow-up comment thread here:
- Injecting even a dollar of federal funds into a new project adds 4-8 years to the completion time of that project. A 1992 report kicked off high-speed rail between Washington and Charlotte, and the EIS for that project should be complete by 2010.
- In the early 20th century, there was forceful opposition to construction of the New York City subway, particularly complaining about the disruption construction would cause. Building rail really is about sacrificing convenience now for the sake of future generations, isn’t it?
- Part of the reason for the success of NYC’s transit is not only that it allowed high density near the lines, but that it forbid high density in other places. If true, we’re in big trouble.
- Towards the end there’s an interesting discussion of optimal fares and how to pay for rail capital costs.
- At about the 40:00 mark, Seattle is cited as a positive example (no, really) because transit here is not viewed as something that just poor people take.
Bremerton Mayor Cary Bozeman steps into the fire…
Ferry passengers are Boiling up and Up….The comments follow the story very, very well….
http://kitsapsun.com/news/2008/feb/13/bozeman-ferry-riders-145boiling-up-and-boiling/
Been hearing small talks of protesting WSF the past few days…Wonder if that will actually happen…
The differences between the Chinook and Snohomish
I’m really curious about the differences between the M/V Chinook and the M/V Snohomish.
Here are the stats and images for the boats from Evergreenfleet.com unless otherwise noted
M/V Chinook
Official Number: D1063252
Call Sign: WCY2726
Length: 143′ 3”
Beam: 39′ 4”
Draft: 5′
Speed in Knots: 30
Horsepower: 7,200
Propulsion: Diesel-Waterjet
Max Passengers: 350
City Built: Anacortes
Year Built/Re-built: 1998
Name Translation: Breeze, wind.
M/V Snohomish
Official Number: D1084026
Call Sign: WCZ4837
Length:143’3″
Beam: 39′ 4″
Draft: 5″
Speed in Knots: 30
Horsepower: 7,200
Propulsion: Diesel-Waterjet
Max Passengers: 350
City Built: Anacortes
Year Built/Re-built: 1999
Meaning of Snohomish : Means “tide water people”.
Now according to Washington State Ferries, the Chinook has a top speed of 38-knots while the Snohomish has a top speed of 30-knots though they were built a year apart, have the same horse power and water jet system
Was this an error on WSF’s part?
Even more setback for the ferry fleet
The woes continue but some relief is coming starting Tuesday for Bremerton riders. Check out the Sound Off’s though…Some of the comments are spot on as to why this all has happened.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/351123_ferry14.html?source=rss
The three 149 passenger ferries, the M/V Snohomish and Victoria Express and Victoria Express II are on the Bremerton to Seattle run. If the weather holds and feeling well enough, I’m planning on taking a ride on the Victoria Express and Snohomish.
You would think WSF would get off their duff’s with how long the Snohomish has been in service now that they would go through the hoops of getting it to it’s maximum size of 350 passengers
Perfect, Meet Good
This post originally appeared on Orphan Road.
I’m a pretty firm believer in alternative energy research, but it sure would be a shame if a mandate to use only renewables ends up derailing the entire California High-Speed Rail project.
Granted, a $40K study is miniscule in the context of a $40B project, and even a study doesn’t commit anyone to anything, so there’s little harm. The danger is that these projects get larded up with everyone else’s pet desires, and the whole thing collapses under its own weight.
Sub-Area Equity
Sub-area equity (SAE) is a favorite whipping boy of transit advocates. If it weren’t for that, they say, we could smuggle those Pierce County dollars up here to create a dense network of rail lines in Seattle! A lot of stuff floating around the legislature this session has sought to do away with it.
While a system focused on dense Seattle neighborhoods has a certain appeal, realistically that kind of plan is a dead duck at the ballot box, for obvious reasons. SAE does force Sound Transit to make some goofy decisions, because it has to spend like crazy in outlying areas to offset the huge capital costs in the core. However, if you look a little past the next ballot measure, SAE will end up working to Seattle’s advantage.
Making the big assumption that something like the most recent workshop proposal gets built, the buildout in Seattle is pretty much done. The Northgate line would probably eventually go out to N. 175th St along the freeway, but that’s relatively cheap, and of more interest to people in Snohomish County. Meanwhile, there are tons of outlying places ST3 can go — to Issaquah, over 520, to Renton, to Tacoma and Everett, etc.
I can picture the ST board, mulling over ST3 and unburdened by SAE, maximizing the investment in the outlying areas, where support for transit is tepid, and banking that earnest Seattle liberals (who are in any case outnumbered) will support it anyway.
SAE would force more investment in Seattle: presumably, in Ballard and West Seattle. With ST2.1 finishing as soon as 2020, we could get service in the Western half of the city by the early 2030s with a little luck.