Tag: Seattle

The PI ran two articles about parking in the city today, in different sections no less!

The article in the local section talked about free parking ending in the South Lake Union (someone please give this neighborhood a better name!). The City will be installing parking meters, and will sell parking at its 1,250 spots for 75¢ an hour. This is half as much as the $1.50 it charges in other neighborhoods. Another 750 spots will be charged at $1.25 an hour in SLU, and the remaining 600 will be charged at the normal $1.50 rate. The rates will be adjusted to ensure there is enough parking for short-term business visitors.

The cover-page article talked about the City’s plan to bring another 350,000 residents into the city by 2040 without cars. That’s 350,000 residents into the city proper, the region is expected about 1.5 million within that timeframe. The city hopes these new residents will take advantage of transit and have fewer cars on average than the typical resident does now. Either by sharing with their family or using flexcar-type programs. For this, the city has eased the rules on parking for commercial and residential developers, and turned more parking spots into pay spots.

I like the idea of people taking more transit, but density is sort of a chicken and the egg problem with regard to transit. Does more density allow for easier and better transit? Probably. But does more transit allow for more density? Definitely. If you want people to ditch their cars, build better transit first, don’t wait for them to decide to take the bus before you put the bus there.

However, with gas prices continually going up, maybe people will decide that the bus is the thing to do.

Community Transit is running a Scottish-made double-decker bus on its routes on a rotating basis. The bus is 14 feet-tall, and apartently can fit 80 people compared to 60 for articulated buses. If this bus recieves good reviews from passengers and drivers, Community Transit will consider getting more of the coaches.

Pros of double-decker vs articulated buses.

• 80 people on double-decker vs 60 for articulated.
• Won’t jack-knife in bad weather.
• Easier to turn

Cons of double-decker

• More expensive, $650,000 vs $580,000.
• Slower boarding.
• At 14 feet tall, can’t fit through all tunnels, and under all bridges.

I am for double-deckers on these long-distance routes. Articulated buses are annoying on city streets, but they are necessary to fit under bridges and powerlines.

I reserve the phrase “The City” for Seattle, since I’m a Bay Area guy, and that’s the terminology down there for San Francisco. But uses it differently in this article about a new transit center in Mountlake Terrace. Apparently the transit center will be in the middle of I-5, with a pedestrian bridge toward a park and ride built in the 2009 timeframe. It looks cool, and includes a 880-space garage that will double park-and-ride capacity. I am all for the median bus lane, but doesn’t that mean these buses will have to merge left toward the median for Mountlake Terrace and then back right for the other stops which are on the left-side near exits? I wonder who thought that scheme up…

Apologies I wrote this post last week but clicked “Save as Draft” rather than publish.

IAmSeattleTraffic.org is an organization trying to get people to take responsibility for their role in creating traffic conditions in the region. Check it out!

…not a modern one. Sure it’s cute, and it goes under the Viaduct and they extended it to go to the International District (all the way to King Street Station), but it’s not modern, and doesn’t attract the ridership that would be useful because:

a) It doesn’t go far enough. It basically serves the waterfront and that’s it. It would have to go to at least the Seattle Center to actually be useful.

b) It is rickety and slow. It’s more of a tourist attraction than a useful transit scheme.

I think the streetcar’s usefulness is exhibited by how empty it is everytime I ride on it. For contrast, the Elliot Bay Water Taxi has been packed each time I have been on it.
c) It doesn’t serve a corridor that is populated by businesses or inhabited by people. If it actually went through Belltown, it’d be a different story, but as it is now, it’s only useful for going to the waterfront.

I know, I am as tired of this topic as you are, but something still needs to be done. Steinbrueck, who has staked his political career on removing the viaduct without creating a new one, has drawn up a plan for a Surface/Transit option. I like the idea of surface/transit, especially since the consensus is that fewer cars drive on SR-99 immediately north and south of the viaduct, which means that people basically use it because it is there, and might not otherwise. The problem I have is with the type of transit they are talking about: buses.

Buses suck compared to trains (I do ride the 545 everyday, so I appreciate the buses). They are noisy, smelly (if they use cardon-based fuels), have bumpy rides, and are at the mercy of traffic. Underground or Elevated trains are immune to traffic, are quiet, are sleak, and have much lower operating costs once built. Even streetcars are better than buses: smoother rides, and some ability to control traffic with special signals. The South Lake Union (can someone come up with a better name for this neighborhood already?) street car will cost only $50.5 million to build, and another $100 million to get it up to the U-District. I think the city should consider this approach, because eventually extending the car down to West Seattle or up to Queen Anne and possibly to Fremont will be relatively easy, or even just linking it with the Lake Union Car might be a real possibility.

Something to think about.

Sunday Night I mentioned the collaspe of one of the feeder-bridges onto the Bay Bridge between the East Bay and the City of San Francisco. Well it seems the commute Monday hasn’t been as bad as people had expected, though the traffic problems could continue for months. Dan Savage thinks this is enough evidence to support tearing down the viaduct, because people, er adjust or something. I actually made a case for this sort of viaduct planning vis-a-vis the Loma Prieta Quake in a letter to the PI four months ago (first one of the page).

I actually see it as a reason to support more off-grade trains. BARTs value has been clearly shown as an alternative to driving through horrible traffic. Apparently ferry service was also increased four-fold, showing just another way that public transport system can be used to ease traffic.

Here’s video of the blast that caused the crash:

According to this article police and Ambulances may have to also pay the $1.50 toll across the bridge.

But dear god! at least the bridge hasn’t melted! That makes me glad I managed to move out of San Francisco a month before the bridge exploded!

With gas looking like it’ll reach $4 a gallon, maybe you should plan on taking the bus to work or school this summer?
Reasons to take the bus
1) Reading, sleeping, playing ds, and talking are more fun that driving, so get a commute partner!
2) Girls (and boys for ladies) that you can try to pick up. It’s worked for me more than you’d imagine.
3) Save on gas (see above).
4) During Summer with the weather nice, no need to worry about getting rained on.
5) No need to fight for parking.
That photo on the left is of San Francisco, where I just left a month ago. Gas there is already $4 a gallon at some stations, though I think that is the station on Harrison and 6th, which is always about 50¢ more than the Chevron across the street.

Methods of commuting in the Seattle area currently leave much to be desired.

It is not a great area to drive. Traffic on the 520 corridor (which I commute on) the 405 corridor through the Eastside or the 5 corridor through the city. From what I understand, driving on 5 near Tacoma is also a pain, as is commuting through the 167 corridor.

It is not a great area to bike. The City as bike lines through some parts of town, particularly great ones Ravenna and Green Lake, but those are not exactly heavy job centers, and the weather precludes bike commuting much of the year.

And it is not a great area to take transit. For one, there is no real mass transit option at the moment – though some will be coming on line in the future – only heavy commuter rails and buses. At this blog, I will attempt to document, discuss, and gripe about the progress and regress that is made in Seattle’s attempt to develop proper transit systems around the area.