25 Replies to “New ST2 Page”

  1. I’m sorry but “Seatac to Overlake” is not a commute. It’s not even a trip anyone would really ever take. And where is parking $10 a day?

    All for a 7-minute savings?

    Who’s gonna dick around on a bus to get to Overlake to take the train to Seatac anyway?

    There are too many problems with the new site’s example to even point out all of them.

    1. I actually do Sea-Tac to Overlake pretty often.

      I really hate seeing this argument come back. Sea-Tac to Overlake doesn’t matter. Overlake to Bellevue does. Overlake to Bel-Red does. Bellevue to Sea-Tac does. Bellevue to Mercer Island does. UW to Overlake does. Capitol Hill to Bellevue does.

      No, Duvall residents aren’t going to use this line very much. You can’t serve Duvall residents with effective transit – and you never will.

      That said, this is great bang for your buck serving Bellevue residents and workers, and UW students, and downtown workers, and an awful lot of Overlake workers who really don’t want to live on the Eastside – a rapidly growing number.

      1. Don’t forget that Link is targeted to run in areas where people would use transit throughout the day.

      2. Yeah actually, this is another point. Link is not just a solution for commutes — I mean, don’t get me wrong, it’s a great solution for commuting and peak hours — but it’s also a solution for those who don’t want to be tied to a car at any time of the day and would like to see a greener region.

    2. Oh come on Brad, who cares? How is this quibble relevant to the proposed light rail expansion? If you’re for it, like most local democrats are (http://www.masstransitnow.org/endorsements/) then you’re for it. If you’re against it, then you’re against it. Quibbling about what “sample commutes” the website gives isn’t the debate we need to be having. If the expansion is flawed, it’s not because the website lists an uncommon commute pattern. And as Ben pointed out, this system is not an end-to-end system.

    3. I work in Overlake and commute by bike. An Overlake station would open up quick lunchtime access to points throughout Bellevue, places I cannot get today without planning ahead and bringing my car to work. I occasionally take buses into Seattle, and a rail line would make that trip much more convenient. And with long-term parking either at work or elsewhere near the station I could make a car/train mixed-mode trip to the airport feasible and save money I now spend on Shuttle Express. The current ST buses from the same point, as good as they are, are not reliable enough to make that commute decision work out, but rail would be.

      Realistically, I probably won’t be working in Overlake when ST2 opens there, assuming a yes vote in November, but I could be. And even if I’m not, lots of people will.

  2. Excuse me Brad? You tell that to the 5,000+ people whom commute from Burien/Sea-tac, whom take 518 (which turns into I-405)

    You tell that to the people whom live in Sea-Tac and go to Bellevue, Kirkland, Redmond, Overlake, etc.

    You really, really need to see a broader scope than “just 7-minutes” The savings is no stress, the savings is no worries about fuel, maintenance, buying new tires, driving in the rain, snow, sleet, which all equal up to a longer commute.

    The commute time DOES NOT change for rail at all unless somebody decides to commit suicide by walking in front of one.

    You being so closed minded has you blinded that there is much more to the entire package than just “a few minutes here and there”

    Since you claim you live in Redmond (or whatever) how would you know the commute habits of those in my area, whom I ride, talk, and associate with all the time. 70% of the people whom ride my MT 123 in the morning take the 545 into Redmond, or they take a the ST 560 and transfer in Bellevue to Redmond. The nearly 200,000 riders on this route proves people do need need to go from Burien/Sea-Tac communities.

  3. Each time I read comments attributed to the name “brad”, I believe more and more he’s the official STB jester.

    The guy just can’t be serious.

    Could he be a pro-transit voice trying to make the Kemper Freeman people look stupid?

    I can’t think of another explanation for such obvious ignorance.

    1. Let’s tone it down a bit — no more personal attacks. Brad’s not a bad guy at all, and he gives this blog a perspectives about the suburbs & exurbs that we otherwise don’t have.

      For what it’s worth, I would guess that he’s more supportive of ST2 than not — but he hasn’t said for sure.

    2. I don’t feel you’ve made a personal attack. I think Brad’s comments intentionally disregard the information that’s been repeatedly presented to him. He takes the most myopic view possible of transportation issues.

  4. Brad’s comments remind me of the perspective put forward by almost all the opponents to Prop 1. They oppose transit investments because they don’t understand how transit works because they don’t use transit. These guys – from the Mark Baerwaldt populist/libertarian left to the Kemper Freeman far right – are actually very easy to figure out. They are creatures of habit, motivated by obsession, failure and ignorance. They love to promote buses, assuming they won’t ever be forced to ever get on a bus.

    Here’s one way you can spot these critters – Emory Bundy provided the prime example last week on Dori Monson: he was talking about how easy, fast, comfortable and convenient the 194 is. In contrast, Bundy cited the horrendous walk / death march required of light rail passengers traveling from SeaTac station to ticketing. Clearly, this blue blood theoretician has never been on the 194. Or, he took a midday ride with no baggage. Either way, Bundy obviously forgot to do his homework – as usual – which would have taught him two basic things: 1) tomorrow’s SeaTac terminal won’t look like it does today; and 2) tomorrow’s I-5 traffic won’t look like it does today.

    Interesting how easy it is for “the smartest guys in the room” to overlook some some of the most simple facts.

    1. Bundy pretty obviously doesn’t ride the 194 at all. Sure, fine, it’s close to baggage claim. If I get a ride, the car isn’t. If I take the bus, there’s nowhere to put my bag (and I usually travel with one), and it can take five or ten minutes for everyone to even board the thing, much less sit in traffic on the way into town.

      You don’t even need to use future conditions. Today’s conditions justify Link.

  5. ok, John. Point taken.

    But it would help if brad’s perspective included a bit more meat.

    “Nobody’s going to ride it” is the same refrain used by every light rail opponent across North America. That “perspective” virtually disappears within a few months of start up.

    Case in point: John Stossel “reporting” from an out-of-commission LA subway ten years ago at the advent of their first underground service. Today, 100k riders per day flood the line. Think John Stossel ever issued a follow-up report correcting his disinformation-laden hit piece? Do you believe Seattle rail opponents will ever come clean with a “we were wrong” statement? (if the all-buses-all-the-time lobby actually lifted a finger to turn general purpose lanes over to rubber tire transit – or if they actually did anything to support the deployment of more service, I might cut ’em some slack)

    It’s fine to say all perspectives are respected. It’s not fine to accept unsubstantiated disinformation campaigns at face value.

    1. brad isn’t totally against LRT, he’s against certain aspects of the scope of service and he will freely admit that.

      1. Those ‘certain aspects of the scope of service’ are aspects of ALL LRT, therefore he opposes all LRT.

      2. Ehhhh, I’m sure I’ve read some vaguely positive things about LRT

        There’s a certain person who springs to mind that puts brad to shame in the hating-LRT arena.

      3. Vaguely positive things about LRT *ARE* the opposition tactic. That’s the entire point – to appear to be on the same side, except for this *oooone* little point that is something new every time.

        It’s kind of like Gregoire saying she supports light rail, just not *this* light rail. Really? So which light rail, exactly, does she support? The ones not in any danger of being funded?

  6. I think most of you took my simple statements and made more than a meal of them.

    If you go back and read what I wrote, then look at the wild exaggerations that some of you made, you’d see that there is little in common.

    You cannot deny that “Seatac” which we assume is the airport to “Overlake” which we assume is the Overlake TC, is a real commute. It’s not.

    I think we can all agree that ST could have done a better job of selecting more ‘typical’ Overlake TC commutes for the new website.

    I’ll leave it to the mob to speculate why other more typical commutes to the Eastside we NOT selected as examples.

    1. It’s a very real trip, actually. I work with people who fly for business regularly, and would always take the train. Probably 50-100 MS employees per day would use that run. That’s not bad for a nearly end to end trip.

      People living west of Sea-Tac would likely use Tukwila or S. 200th stations and come to work. They’d be leaving earlier than the downtown workers, so they would get park and ride space, likely.

  7. Oh, and stepping away from the attacks, and since I have your attention, I’m curious as to why this blog hasn’t discussed the presidential candidates and how their records/positions would affect Puget Sound transit. Even if this blog is non-partisan, a discussion of the platforms is germane, especially since their records are vastly different, especially in regard to rail.

    Guess which one hates Amtrak?

    1. I’ve actually mentioned Biden as a friend in a couple of posts and comments. He’d definitely be great for us.

      Honestly, though, Amtrak Cascades was what got me into this, and I should write something about it.

Comments are closed.