Slog - The Stranger's Blog

Line Out

The Music Blog

« Jen Graves Hates Art? Pshaw! | "The Lonely Planet Guide to My... »

Monday, April 24, 2006

Transportation Solutions

Posted by on April 24 at 16:19 PM

I made the mistake of reading this while I was eating my lunch—some of us still like print newspapers, Eli, and some of us even work at one—and nearly puked. The Seattle Times is praising Ron Sims latest transportation plan—buses! More of them! Lots more!

…a fast-growing region cannot afford to be blasĂ© about transportation planning. This is a smart time to invest in transportation.

Buses are a flexible, useful way to move people around if land-use and transportation policies are in sync enough to provide sufficient ridership….

Sims’ so-called “RapidRide” would change the way riders think about bus riding. Riders in key areas would not need bus schedules, as buses would arrive every 10 minutes throughout the day.

Yeah, a fast-growing region cannot afford to be blasĂ© about transportation planning. Tell us all about it, Seattle Times. Because we’re really great at planning transportation fixes around here—and yakking about them, and studying them, and trashing them. What we’re not so good at is, as you know, is actually fucking building them. Witness the monorail’s collapse, which The Seattle Times did everything in its power to bring about. So now we’re never going to have a real rapid transit system in this city—something that is grade-separated, something like a subway system or an elevated system, a transportation option that would be faster than driving—and so that leaves… buses.

Buses—the public transportation option favored by people who do not take public transportation. I’m going to go out on a limb here and guess that there aren’t any bus commuters on the Seattle Times op-ed board. And Ron Sims? That man only rides the bus for photo-ops. Buses are slow, noisy, and dirty. And thanks to our ride-free area downtown, around here they’re also rolling homeless shelters. Putting more of slow, crowded, stinky buses on the streets isn’t going to do anything to address Seattle’s transportation problem.

Because only grade-separated rapid transit can tempt people out of their cars. People don’t take the subway in New York or the “L” in Chicago because it’s virtuous. They take public transit in those cities because it’s faster than driving. Buses—slow, stuck in traffic, unpleasant—can’t offer commuters speed in exchange for sacrificing the autonomy and privacy of driving. So putting more of them on the street won’t change a fucking thing—and it’s not worth raising taxes to do, as Sims is proposing.

But, gee, what about dedicated bus lanes? Won’t that make buses swift and speedy?

Uh, maybe. But it’s never gonna happen. One of the complaints about the monorail—and the Seattle Times never met a complaint about the monorail that it wouldn’t splash all over its front page—was that it would take a few lanes away from cars on a couple of downtown streets. This, of course, annoyed drivers, who seem to think that they own the streets, and the Seattle Times spent a lot of time feeling their pain. Can you imagine the outcry if Sims actually tries to take lanes away from cars on dozens of streets running all over the country so that buses can use them exclusively? The few HOV lanes we’ve got make drivers crazy—those same drivers are not going to smile on hundreds of miles of dedicated bus lanes, and they will punish any pol who proposes such a scheme.

Let’s face it, folks. We blew it—elevated transit was our only real transportation solution (tunnels are too expensive), and a lack of courage on the part of our elected officials (fuck you, Greg & Ron), the bungling at the monorail agency, the greed of Second Avenue property owners, and the furious cluelessness of the media all conspired to do it in. The least we can do now is refrain from pretending that buses are going to make things better. Get used to those long commutes, folks, whether you’re sitting alone in your car or sitting next to some street lunatic on the bus. Or move closer to work. Those are your only options now—thanks, in large part, to the Seattle Times.


CommentsRSS icon

you tell it Dan! buses are the pits

and around here, they're all giant sized for some reason, and make it dangerous for the cars, pedestrians, bikes etc with which they share the street

I would say "in part"... their contribution wasn't "large".

We did (kinda) blow it. The monorail was the best option we had. But light rail is better than busses. At least the rails can't be easily moved, giving developers incentive to cluster near stops.

I took the bus during rush hour from Northgate for two years, and the lone benefit was that I could read instead of giving people the finger. It still took half an hour or more to get to work, and that was *after* waiting for the bus at a shelter that was constantly under construction and unpleasant. Naturally, owing to extreme traffic congestion, the bus was constantly late or super early, so the only way Sims' "every ten minutes" dream will ever fly is if we build a monorail to tow the busses around town.

That said, increased light rail is now, literally, our only hope. Hope you all can get behind it at some point.

Don't worry we can just build more roads for all those buses to drive on.

Nice rant, Dan.


I've been riding the buses now for 3 years, and I only meet the occasional lunatic (and they're totally harmless and sometimes quite entertaining). Most of the crazy people in this city are the ones who drive these massive station wagons around downtown wondering why they can't fit into a spot.


If there's anything I'd add to what you said, it's that there's another reason why people in New York and Chicago ride the rail system. It's a pain in the ass to have a car there. If adding more buses causes it to be a bigger headache to drive around here in any way, it gets us that much closer to a real alternative.

Dan, where do you get the idea that a publically operated monorail or a train wouldn't end up as dirty or noisy as buses are right now? They're dirty because they're accesible. Monorails still make noise as they pass. And as fast as they are, that can be negated by infrequent passes along a line. Any wait beyond 30 minutes a run negates its speed efficiency.

Vilifying buses is not a step in the right direction. Attack the plan, not the mode of transport, because in doing so, you are attacking public transit in general.

holy moly --- the bus add on proposal will cost 25.00 per year for each household....less for those of us who are minimalist and spend little - almost zero that is subject to sales tax...

that is 2.00 a month dan --- sorry you are so hard up....

for tens of thousands of folks the bus is perfect......don't take them if it isn't for you.....

mary mother of god....the monorail was one line.....but somehow would have solved all transportation problems for the entire city and uban as well.....holy mother of god...

love the idea of better metro...I will pay my 2.00 a month with no problem....quick, easily routed around, interchangable, no billions on new infrastructure.....god, thak you for ron sims...

next part of the overall. multi faceted solution? bring it on.....

Great rant.

This is urban planning by musical chairs.

More buses for already congested roads, belching out the worst exaust of any vehicle on the road, hopelessly slower than even the crawling car commute.

And what do almost all of these buses run on? Diesel. Even the hyped "hybrid" buses get something 1.6 miles to the gallon. It's a fucking pipe dream to think that oil is going to get cheaper. All this new tax is going to is pay for ever rising fuel costs.

Who are Greg and Ron kidding with all this bullshit posturing over reducing CO2? Cars and buses contribute the majority of the carbon we pump out. People won't abandon their cars out of the goodness of their hearts. They do so to get a faster fucking commute.

Hey, you supported Nickels.

Yeah, I supported Greg "We are going to build the monorail" Nickels. Until he pulled the rug out from under the Monorail. Then I asked for my contribution back, and voted for Runte.

Homeless people don't ride "grade-separated rapid transit" in other cities?

Nothing is going to happen in Seattle because the monorail didn't?

Tunnels are too expensive, but the monorail wasn't?

The argument against the monorail did not significantly revolve around its impact on street level transportation, but the monorail's experience proves that a much less expensive bus only lane would be politically impossible?

This is WHINING. With no evidence. Full of non-sequiteurs. And it's more of the same bricks-and-mortar reasoning that informs how this city will build fancy new libraries but not staff them, and schools will build fancy new buildings while cutting teacher salaries and increasing classroom size.

Dan, you're more attached to a particular SYMBOL of mass transit than a functional system.

I wanted a monorail too. One with a board that wasn't corrupt and full of overstatements and lies. That would go straight down Second Ave instead of contorting itself around Belltown whiners. That would put reasonably sized parking lots at stations outside the downtown core. That would get access to federal funds instead of Sound Transit. That big business would get behind. That didn't happen. It sucks. But it didn't.

I don't know if you own a car. But I don't. And I could fucking use some better bus service until someone comes up with a better idea (Sound Transit is useless to me). If your every answer to pragmatic attempts to make things somewhat better in this city is to piss and moan about the loss of the monorail, as if it was perfect, as if there's nothing left we can do, then you're useless.

Well, I've just come from Boston, and I have to say I think subways are overrated. Maybe they're a bit quicker than busses, but not much, and wating in those underground stations in summer can be hellish. Plus about half the places I wanted to get I had to take a bus anyway. And honestly, for the busses that ran every ten minutes, I didn't care a bit that they weren't underground.

I've only been in Seattle for a few days, so I don't have it figured out completely, but I've had no real problems adjusting to the bus system here. Put a few more out there and I'll be fine. If we eventually make them all fully electric one way or another, and why bother with all the money and time for something more elaborate?

i live in west seattle. i am still devastated about the monorail. you think traffic is bad now? wait until they start monkeying around with the viaduct.

i do not want to move out of my beautiful neighborhood. but, man, when 99 is closed, or there is a wreck or, sometimes, when it is just raining for crying out loud, it is a nightmare of a commute.

and, today i paid $98 in seattle monorail tax to renew my car tabs. the tax didn't bother me until the monorail was shot down in flames. after a number of frustrating phone calls and visits to websites, i discovered that the monorail tax will be collected until the debt is paid off.

and if it is paid off today but the books haven't caught up with the paperwork? or let's say the property purchased for the monorail plan is sold and yields a greater profit than anticipated, thereby putting the debt well over paid status?

sorry charlie, no refunds. i call fucking bullshit on this city's pathetic lack of a public transportation plan.

i would, however, like to give a big shout out to the fine folks at the 6th ave. s. vehicle emission inspection station. what a jovial bunch of people! i think they could possibly be high from the fumes. i did receive some helpful advice from the technician about what i should do if i am in a building attacked by terrorists (run).

Hi I'm Ron Sim
My plan would mean a bus for every man, woman, and transgendered child in this city. This is a bold plan that will:
-Eliminate bus schedules completely
-Elimiante the possiblility of riding with a homeless person becasue nobody would be homeless.
-Full employment

Just because the praise is hypocritical coming from the Seattle Times doesn't mean that more frequent bus service isn't a good idea. The failure of grade-separated transit and of the local media and politicians to support it through tough times (including the Stranger's freak out over the preliminary finance plan) was thoroughly disappointing, but that's the current reality.

Sparse service is a reason that a lot of people don't take the bus, and although adding more busses won't solve all of our problems it is an inexpensive way of making things better. Not having to wait around for the next bus may prove to be an incentive for those who'd rather not deal with finding or paying for parking, or for the hassle of getting stuck in traffic.

Kerri, as a fellow west seattlite, I feel your pain. It would have been great to go to the 4 o'clock rock shows at the sunset tavern, get sloshed without having to worry about driving, and pour myself onto a monorail going back home.

So much of the media is celebrating the sale of the monorail properties, but 5, 10 years down the road, when gas is 8 or 9 bucks a gallon and traffic all over city is slowed to a snail pace with our increased population (and more cars to go along with it), we'll regret not building the monorail.

Dan,
You were so right about the Monorail, Dan. Why wouldn't they listen to you, and only you?

Don't you have a speech to give somewhere?

Buses are really gross. I think the monorail would have been gross too, and I don't know why Dan Savage thinks it would have been different. The homeless love public transit in any form. I used to live in NY and the line I had to take home to Queens was disgusting, I remember always having to change cars because of vomit or urine. But I bike everywhere so I don't really care anymore. If all the able-bodied people in this city started biking instead of driving or taking the bus, our transportation issues would be solved. But of course I'm just silly, bikes aren't really transportation, they're toys, they're for children. I've heard it a million times. Of course, in Copenhagen, fully one third of people commute by bike and they have the least polluted, most walkable downtown in Europe. But I'm just being silly, i know.

cite -- biking would be a lot more attractive option for the non-athletes in the crowd if the city were flatter and had more dedicated bike lanes. we can't really deal with the topography, but making cycling safer should be a definite possibility.

Those "bike" lanes are usually more like door lanes... I'd rather do without them. It's safer just to take the lane.

If you want to encourage biking, a better idea would be to offer bike lockers in all the business districts. It's not safe to leave your bike outside in most places, no matter how good your lock is.

And free public showers. Sure, they'll be inundated with homeless people, but at least that will solve the smelly bus problem as well.

There are so many things we could do to make biking a more realistic option for a large number of people...and they will do a few token things because we fancy ourselves a "progressive" city, but it won't be anything truly structural because that get in the way of cars and buses -- can't have that!

The over-paid consultocrats that killed the Commons, er - Monorail, from the inside have been driven from the town in shame. A new financing plan was offered at the eleventh hour, but it hardly got a fair shake in the poisoned cloud of their management meltdown.

The dust has settled.

America has begun to face the reality of $5/gallon gas.

The city still holds deeds to most of the monorail right-aways.

Despite victory after victory after victory after victory at petition table and the ballot box the monorail doesn't get back on the table is:

it's not a football stadium?

Where's the Monorail street-fight team?

You know it's the right thing for this town. You know the previous election was botched by circumstance, not reason. So, why give up?

Can't we put an injunction on those property sales while we pursue another petition drive? Why wasn't this possibility even discussed after the election?

If anybody gives a damn, they have to give a damn.

Despite victory after victory after victory after victory at petition table and the ballot box THE REASON the monorail doesn't get back on the table :

it's not a football stadium?


------ Sorry. I'll start using the preview dealie.

Jennifer --

You're just nutso to think that subways are only slightly faster than busses based on -- of all places -- Boston.

First off, Boston's subway is an outlier in the wonderful world of underground rail. It's about as old as it gest here in the USA. The tracks are antiquated, the signalling sucks and nothing was remotely built to go at speeds. When it was put in it was a lot faster than walking or horse-drawn busing (its major competitors).

NY (where I grew up) has fast, efficient subway service. And I assure you that the 25 minutes during rush hour to go from 103d street to Wall Street is about as fast as it gets. And that's on tracks that are more than 80-90 years old, with a change to the express subway at 96th street. It's also about 1/10th as expensive as a cab, and about a million times faster than a bus.

So is the Bart in SF and the Metro here in DC, where I now work.

One more thing about biking in this town...why the hell don't they have some kind of bike lane option across 520? At this point, I-90 is the only way to get across the lake without going all the way around it. Stupid!

I get it: Dan is still upset over the demise of the monorail. Still, that is not much of a reason to attack the plan put forward by my boss, Ron Sims, to expand Metro bus service, including the creation of five Bus Rapid Transit lines, two of which will cover the route that the monorail had been intended to serve.
Dan may not like buses, but even if the monorail had been built, the bus system would have remained the backbone of our entire transit system. Metro provides 100 million rides a year, and 335,000 rides on a typical weekday -- and, cheap shot stereotypes of bus riders aside, a lot, perhaps even a substantial majority, of those riders are a) not homeless and b) adhere to rigorous standards of hygiene for which Stranger employees are so justifiably famous.
Moreover, demand for Metro service is rising. We provided 2 million more rides in 2005 as compared to 2004, and our surveys show that we could provide millions more annually if we provided more frequent and consistent service. Right now, because of the loss of revenues associated with the passage of I-695, which took away Metro's MVET funding, Metro can not keep up with either increased demand or projected economic growth. The implementation of this proposal would change that.
The fact, is that even if the monorail had been built, we still would have needed to expand Metro service. For one thing, who do you think was going to feed all those passengers to the 19, ahem, 16 monorail stations? And this plan will do that at a cost of $25 per year for the typical King County household, or, to put it a little more pointedly, for less than the cost of a single tank of gas.

Dan, don't be a hater. The inside of a bus is no different from the inside of a monorail or subway car - they're all dirty. The "rolling homeless shelter" problem exists in the downtown ride free zone, but not everywhere else. And lunatics ride all types of public transportation - the NYC jerk-off creep was photographed on the subway.

Losing the monorail was tragic, but don't take it out on buses. Buses every 10 minutes makes it more convenient to get around town without a car. That's a good thing.

Dan, look, we're in for a world of hurt right now, and more bus service in Seattle won't hurt us.

Quit yer hatin.

OMFG, I might have to pay 0.5 cents more! Meanwhile my gas price is up 50 cents.

Hmmm. Ahh. Ummm. Never mind - I'm voting for the Sims plan while Mayor Gridlock plans NOTHING for the oncoming nightmare downtown.

oh, and if you want to see a real city transit system - go up to Vancouver BC - I just did Easter weekend and it makes me sick how lame we in Seattle are.

I don't think Vancouver is that great. I went up there expecting some sort of utopia, the way people in Seattle gush over it. It was nice, it was fine...but it ain't Paris.

ahh..but, then again, else what is? Paris, I mean.

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).