Light rail is out of the 520 plan officially. As Ben said a couple of months ago, not necessarily the worst thing in the world.
However, Ron Sims and the anti-rail noisemakers are upsetting me again:
The decision to focus on bus rapid transit on 520 has led to a new buzz for bus rapid transit in the Interstate 90 corridor, particularly as a short-term substitute for more-expensive light rail.
Sound Transit, the agency that has worked for years developing light rail in a north-south corridor, last week delayed until April 10 a board vote on a revised transportation package to possibly be sent to voters this fall. The board is mulling its response to the November defeat of a comprehensive roads and transit package. The measure included funding for light rail across I-90 and an “Eastlink” at least to growing Bellevue, one of the region’s biggest employers.
“The decision has been made on 520: four general-purpose lanes and two high-occupancy vehicle lanes, and it’s going to have bus rapid transit, not light rail,” said King County Executive Ron Sims.
…
King County, helped by federal transportation policies and funding, is bullish on buses. While Sims supports light rail as a needed “spine,” he considers buses the “rib cage” of a transportation system. With gas and parking costs climbing, bus ridership already exceeds demand, Sims said.
Lay it to rest, Ron! Obviously, you love your bus feifdom you’ve created, and you’d love to see more buses over rail. But would ridership be better that way? Isn’t that what this is all about? Repeated studies show vastly more ridership with much better service over I-90 on rail.
At least other people in the are an the right track:
The cost of Seattle-Redmond light rail service at up to $3.9 billion, compared with up to $3.4 billion for buses that would run in exclusive lanes with doors on both sides of the vehicles, basing figures on 2005 dollars. The study estimated that the rail system would carry an average of 35,000 passengers each weekday, while the bus system would carry 24,500, with light rail travel times three minutes shorter between the two cities.
Seems obvious which one is better…
Sounds like Mr. Sims needs to get a “spine” and listen to what his constituents want.
So, when does Rom Sims get replaced?
I’m glad that light rail is out of current SR 520 plans. That would add so much money and time to a project already over-budget and behind schedule.
If everyone listened to Ron Sims, I wonder what would happen when roads begin to get congested with buses expelling gas, diesel, or whatever fuels they use, in King County?
By the time light-rail ever gets to the 520 area, it would be years after ST2 is done, by then, maybe we’ll be talking about other bridge projects.
Excuse me, but WTF does this mean?
“bus ridership already exceeds demand”
Umm.. Wouldn’t the ridership be equal to the demand?
Excuse me, but WTF does this mean?
“bus ridership already exceeds demand”
Umm.. Wouldn’t the ridership be equal to the demand?
hahaha
[ad hom]
Re: ridership exceeds demand. Please note that it is not a direct quote, but a paraphrasing of his words. Speaking as one who has been paraphrased in print before, I wouldn’t be surprised if his actual statement was far from the print version.
Eliminating light rail on SR 520 provides two good things: 1) We can get moving with this project and 2) We don’t pretend that it’s going to be a simple retrofit to make it rail-compatible. That’s what they said with the Bus Tunnel and that’s what they said with the I-90 Bridge. So it’s simply telling it like it is.
The bus tunnel and 90 are both simple retrofits…
If they’re so simple why have they taken so long?
Ridership is not equal to demand. In West Seattle at least, several people drive to work because the buses are standing-room only.
Has the fat lady finished singing the tune, and the audience left the venue yet?
Until recently, I was a bit lazy in my support of transit issues. I voted for transit when given the chance, and didn’t know much the rest of the time. So I have to admit that I am ignorant of how this fits into the overall scheme of things.
What does this mean for construction of the next 520 bridge? When will that bridge start and end construction? How long will it last? What are the population predictions at the east end?
Also, it seems to me that the southern (405) and middle (520) routes get a lot of talk and the northern (Bothell/Everett) route never gets much play. Is this because of the Snohomish/King county line? What are the dynamics up there?
anonymous – don’t troll. The DSTT retrofit is done, and has been for months.
I-90 doesn’t have money yet because of the Governor and Legislature postponing ST2, and then the Proposition 1 vote failing.
from NickB: Excuse me, but WTF does this mean?
“bus ridership already exceeds demand”
It could have been phrased better, but the point is pretty obvious…
In Bellevue alone there are plenty of rush hour buses that are standing room only, and they say they don’t have more money to add buses…