Comments on How to Identify Real Mass Transit

I'm straight and all, but talk like this gets me all hot under the collar. Thanks JG

Why will light rail be able to travel so fast through downtown? Because it will run grade-separated (just below-grade instead of above-grade).

It was the decision to run light rail grade-separated through downtown that makes me much more hopeful in the long run for Seattle transit-wise than Portland. Portland's light rail line runs at-grade through downtown, and it doesn't exactly zip along, especially when the streets are crowded, as I learned by accident the hard way one year during the Rose Festival.

Now, when I talk about being hopeful for Seattle in the long run, I'm afraid I'm talking very, very, very long run. I'm talking "In the long run, we are all dead" long run.

Sorry, I'm waiting for the damn thing to get to Northgate and the Eastside before I start celebrating.

Which presidential candidate is most likely to push transit funds? I mean most likely to win, push for the funding, and get it.

Oh, if there's one thing about real mass transit that the foes of real mass transit absolutely, uncontrollably hate about it, it isn't the price tag. It is this very thing Jonathan describes, the speed (and reliability). Seeing Link light rail running with subway-like speeds and headways will provoke a reaction among Seattle's "bus rapid transit" folk not unlike the reaction a Talibani would have to seeing a hot Muslim woman walking around in a mini-skirt.

HOT DAMN! This is great news for city-dwellers. I'm gonna buy an extra drink tonight to celebrate.

Three minutes from CH to the
U-District? Wow! That is
fast, however by "U-District"
does the press release mean
the south end of Husky
stadium? If this is indeed
the case, how many additional
minutes will it take to get
from Husky stadium to the
U-District proper? Another
twenty to Brooklyn and 45th?
Perhaps longer waiting for
that smelly, old Metro bus?

--- Jensen

You'll be able to get a rock on Broadway and sell it on Univeristy with virtually no carrying costs. That is exciting news, will they be able to extend this to people commute to work?

As a corollary to @4, if there's one example of rail transit that the mass transit foes absolutely love, it is the SLU streetcar. Seeing the streetcar crawl along at speeds that make pedestrians look like cheetahs (and operate with the reliability of Yugos) is as pleasing a sight to transit haters as watching ARod choke in the postseason is to an M's fan.

WoooOOOOooo WoooOOOOooo!!

The Sound Transit web site used to list how many minutes light rail would take from stop-to-stop, and I remember that Capitol Hill to the U District took more time on light rail than the 43 bus on off-peak times. It was at least 10 minutes but I don't remember the exact number.

Dear Science, can you figure out how fast light rail would have to go to make this trip in 3 minutes? It has to be a lot faster than 60 mph, right?

#6: Light rail isn't going any further than Husky Stadium and isn't going to the "U-District proper." ST2 failed and Sound Transit won't go a few blocks up Pacific unless we also give them money to go to Fife, Redondo, Bel-Red Road, Mountlake Terrace, etc.

I am curious. Where does
that 22 minute bus trip
from CH to the U District
cited by the press release
and emphasized by our dear
Jonathan begin and end?
Is the comparison being
made in the press release
valid?

--- Jensen

I predict three minutes from the Hill to the U-District.

But only after seven or eight years of cut and cover tunneling which will empty Broadway and make living on the Hill a Hell on Earth.

You've got the 49 to the UW... that is easily 20 minutes. You've got the 43, also about 20 minutes.

You've got the 70's, but you have to get downtown first to catch them. If they take the express lanes and there is no traffic, 10 minutes. If they are from the UW to downtown at 5pm, about 30 to 45 minutes to get back into the tunnel (dont forget it is standing room only).

I'd easily buy 22 minutes. People seem to think it is a quick trip to the UW. It is, but only under the right conditions, which rarely line up with your schedule.

Too bad I've already got my degree. I'd have loved to take the light rail instead of the damn slow ass 49/43

Also, if you read through the engineering documents on soundtransit, you can see how anal they get about things like curves in the track. I recall reading in the EIS something about how "if we used $RAIL_BRAND_X instead of $RAIL_BRAND_Y under the UW it would make the train take 30 seconds longer". These guys are serious about this kind of thing.

I have no doubt the accuracy for transit times is in terms of tens of seconds, if not plain old seconds.

I thought light rail to Northgate was already a done deal?

triple reply baby...

@12,

The only part that will get dug up is the area between Cal Anderson park and Broadway for the station. The rest is all bored by a (couple?) tunnel boring machines.

It will suck, but I suspect the city has been putting off a lot of road maintenance on broadway waiting for the station to be complete.

@15,

They are 100% funded to the Husky stadium only. It is 100% fact that we will at least get lightrail that far (by 2016 anyway)

From what I understand, Sound Transit is trying to beg, borrow, and steal some cash to go to at least Brooklyn regardless of any future election.

From general UW area to Northgate, it would have been a done deal with Prop 1. Now it is up to Prop 1, Version 2.0 to get funding for that portion of the transit system.

And yes. 2016 is when we'll be able to go from Broadway to the UW. I really wish there was a way to throw cash at them to speed it all up :-)

Napoleon
Rail is happening. Soon as people start using it your idea of Lesser Seattle will be as obviously dead to you as it is to everyone else now.
Even you must be happy when you go to the airport and see rail being built.

The more important number is door to door. If the average walk and maybe bus trip to the one stop on all of Capitol Hill for LINK is 15 minutes then the three minute trip is 18 minutes. The only advatage that bus has over rail besides capital expense is that they go near to where many more people live. LINK gets its speed by not having nearly enough stops for urban transit. So Mr. Science pick spots that are 1/2 a mile away, 3/4 of a mile away and work out the times. If you live on the north end of Broadway how long will it take on the 49 vs LINK to 45th and U Way? Answer: 15 minutes by bus - It takes about 5 minutes from B&R to the above the LINK station a couple minutes down the ? feet and then an average wait of 3 minutes at peak plus the 3 minute ride that takes you to Husky Stadium (another two minutes to 45th in 2018) for a total of 13 minutes.

23rd and Madison to Husky Stadium - by LINK 10 minutes by bus 9 minutes.

23rd and Roy to Husky stadium 8 minutes on the bus. By LINK 15 minutes.

BTW for a tunnel with 5% engineering and no bids, you all have a lot of confidence. And the trip under the UW won't be at 55 mph, read the "agreement"

Holy shit! I am so glad we never got to vote for this. Boo to Seattle politics-- if it's not perfect, it's not happening, and nothing ever gets done. Look on the bright side people, there will be rapid mass transit in Seattle sometime in YOUR lifetime! In the 21st century no less!
Also, I think there should be a gondola from Husky Stadium up to 45th.

Damn. Looks like the only way this city will ever get anything is when the feds step in and hand it to us.

Oh well, we're getting a fucking light rail system. In spite of ourselves. w00t!

Um, we did vote for this. It even passed. Circa 1998, right? We voted to get it to Northgate but it never panned out that way. All we could afford with the tax we voted on was to the UW. There is a lot of history around sound transit and that election. I'll refrain from commentary, but I will say that at the point in time, Sound Transit is probably the most transparent transit agency in the state. Try to find anything about how Metro spends its money. Sound Transit has it all on their website, you just have to wade though their crappy navigation :-)

"BTW for a tunnel with 5% engineering and no bids"

It depends on what parts got engineered. Do you really need 100% engineering on the stations to know it takes 3 minutes to get from Capitol Hill to the UW? As long as you know the route and the type of rail. The only wildcard I'd see is under the UW. Those picky professors dont want the any vibrations or EMF trashing their experiments (wont somebody please think of the land value!!!)

crk - do you have a link that shows the financing to the UW? In October the cost estimate went up $100 million, is that in the funding numbers?

If a Dem wins the WH, Patty will probably get whatever is needed to to get to the UW.

Right now they just have the one boring machine and I doubt they will get another as the owners need to keep them working. There aren't that many $3-4 billion dollar tunnel projects (Westlake to 75th ) around.

Postergirl - why don't you consider Portland if Seattle is Lesser.

do the math @19:

The more important number is door to door. If the average walk and maybe bus trip to the one stop on all of Capitol Hill for LINK is 15 minutes then the three minute trip is 18 minutes. The only advatage that bus has over rail besides capital expense is that they go near to where many more people live.

So "do the math" (or whatever you'd been calling yourself before), let me get this straight. Apparently, the people who will live near light rail stations--and the people who will be drawn to live nearby thanks to light rail—don't count according to your selective mathematics.

Sure, for locations far from rail stations, buses will do better. But if buses will be better when the development is spread out, then the effectiveness of buses is beside the point. In that case, cars will do better than buses. And somehow, I have a hunch that's the comparison you really care about.

btw... a better question is how long does it take a student living on beacon hill/MLK to get to the UW via the lightrail. Compare that to what it took by bus.

Captiol Hill to UW isn't probably the big attraction. But I'd do downtown to capitol hill and walk instead of the 14 just for the coolness factor alone!

crk - I'm not doubting the times, I/m doubting that it will be built at the most recent budget and schedule. If you would read the UW/ST agreement, you might reconsider the route.

Metro has great data and much more to keep track of. They carry over 100,000,000 people a year and run the buses for ST, the streetcars and will run LINK.

Can you give a link to what Cocker/Fennessey has been paid for PR?

Dunno cressona.. I'm no accountant.

All the financial crap is here:

http://www.soundtransit.org/x1230.xml

The EIS for the north link (which includes everything to northgate) is here:
http://www.soundtransit.org/x3009.xml

Their financial estimates are in chapter 5. The U link is broken out as chapter 5.5

The 2002 estimate for the link to the UW was 4.153 billion in 2002 dollars. Is that $100m "over budget" really "over budget" from higher construction costs (or even higher interest) or is it just an inflationary adjustment. Gotta watch that. People always forget to factor in inflation.

Even if you left out inflation, with a budget of 4,153 million, going over by 100 million is only 2%. In other words, is it really a big deal?

Three minutes from CH to Husky stadium
is a remarkably efficent travel time, however I am beginning to question if it is effective means of transporting people from place to place. I believe Do The Math addressed this in their comments at No.19. The efficency of a
transportation system and its effectiveness are two separate but related issues. Will people find it
in their interest to utilize the
Husky stadium station if it requires them a longer travel duration with
more transit intervals (tranfers) than it would if they simply stepped aboard a bus...or continued to use
their car?

--- Jensen

mr. math... if you are thinking what I'm thinking...



I couldn't find the text of the agreement, but I know where you are going. The whole "but Mr. Lightrail, my experiment now has vibrations and the whole UW is no longer a oasis of vibration free land... now we can't get grants and my experiments won't be valid!", right? I dont feel like going through the comments again, but I recall there being many comments from UW professors with real, live equations in them. I recall the contractors rebuttals, also featuring real, live equations.



Will it be done on time? I'd give it a variance of a year. Most of the time is spend boring a tunnel. We kinda sorta know what the soil is, so we kinda sorta know how long that takes. They are probably smarter about this than they were under beacon hill, were they mis-judged the soil there.



Will it be within 10% of the original budget? Depends on interest rates and, like you say, the NIMBY professor factor.



So, a beer says they will be within 6 months of their time estimate. As for budget, I'd be surprised if it went over %15 but I'd say it will never go over %25. A beer says %10.

crk- I was trying to contrast with the monorail, which landed on the ballot four separate times.

Cressona you don't git it man.

23rd and Madison is not far from the one LINK stop. BTW what is the potential for the area around Nagle and John. What are the height limits? 65 or 85 feet?

I'm clearly not saying no transit or even no rail transit but when people start saying its only three minutes from Cap Hill to the UD I think that's misleading. Also calling this system transit is a stretch in that there are not enough stops, this is sort of a slow express service to the burbs. RV is slow then 6 miles of "transit" with no stops. It's a light rail that doesn't take advantage of LR's strength which is that it should be cheaper than heavy rail.

And on the other posts that talk about condos all the commenters bitch they can't afford to buy - so who will be riding from the high rises around the Nagle stop to the UW - the deans, regents and tenured full professors?

This system will serve the better off because there isn't enough of it and can't ever be enough because it's too expensive.

See, there is no contrast with the monorail because the monorail was a pipe dream that deserved to die :-)

Even if it didn't get voted down, it never would have been built. I'd buy you a whole six pack if that thing was built (but I wouldn't live here anymore because I value good urban design).

How fast is it compared to the monorail?

Monorail: Infinity Minutes
Light Rail: Three Minutes

:-)

Mr. Math,

The whole thing will be a *huge* waste of money if it doesn't grow beyond what we have funded now. What is funded now is cool, but not very useful. In a way, it is like the SLUT. Practice for a real transit system. Unlike the SLUT, we have to build the practice route like it was a real transit system or face rebuilding it later (read big, big $$$). That means big boy stuff like huge stations that handle very long trains. That means worrying about 30 extra seconds; when you pump a train down the line at four minute intervals, 30 seconds matters.

But is what we are doing now worth the risk? Once the central link is built, will people be so impressed they vote to expand this sucker to Microsoft in Redmond? Will the dudes in federal way be jealous and want their share? What about all that stuff by frys?

I dunno. It is a risk no matter what we do. We can build it, everybody moves in and new development centers around the lightrail instead of the freeway. We can not build it and expand our freeway and keep growth centered around that. We can also say "fuck growth" and let god sort it out.

I'll assert one thing. Freeway traffic will be bad no matter what. The light rail will not reduce traffic in the long haul. The only thing lightrail buys you is that you never have to expand the freeway in terms of right-of-way again; no more lanes. Proof is driving in dense traffic from Oakland International to Berkely only to get on a standing room only BART to San Fransisco :-) On a well designed transit system, most development gets centered along the light rail, which is why the "waaaahhh.. my single story bar" people can go piss up a rope.

crk - are you a drunk :p

I'll get you the UW agreement - I think the tunnel will not be a fied price contract and they never know what they will run into that deep including water and soil that needs grouting.

What budget are we betting on. The one they come out with a week before it's done or todays?

here's the link to a PI article with the UW agreement link - read it and tell me it's an agreement.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/318714_uwrail07.html

Don't forget the wait for the elevator you hill dwellers.
That sucker is going to be deep down there, and the elevators will take forever. You may have to wait for two or even three to empty the trains discharge

Hanging out in the bowels of the earth waiting for the elevator with wackos, wierdos, and whomevers.

Cool, HUH?

But since the SMP voted to never build the project the monorail is waaaay under budget and infinitely ahead of schedule.

Mr. Math, I do, in fact have a tasty beer right now. It was, in fact, a 24oz porter of some kind and it is indeed quite good.

So are thinking the UW NIMBY factor is what will blow the budget?

"Limits on magnetic fields and vibration, to protect university research facilities while trains are running."

Bastards. I thought professors were mega-liberal and voted for the green party or something!? I can't believe they all bitch about having good transit to the campus. I will refrain from dissing the physics professors as most of them are cool, but they are probably the ones behind this. Bastards.

The elevator will indeed be weird. Maybe it should be an escalator that descents 150 feet instead, eh? I can only hope they dont smell like the perma-piss smell that is the bus tunnel elevators.

crk last post for me - of course people will want more - I love the Seattle-PT PO run so what? The LINK route IS where the freeways run. There is next to no urban transit in LINK and no Federal Way is not urban. LINK is modeling itself after 1865 train routes with villages around the stops - this is not an urban transit system - it will not create or help create the kind of density a real urban setting requires.

Be well, sleep well, dream well

Last post? Diss...

I know exactly what you are saying. It is basically the "train" version of a freeway. Could you say BART is the same thing? Is the MAX the same thing?

What about SLUT for local + LINK for regional?

crk - really I can quit anytime.
yes bart and max like link but SF has in-city transit.

Streetcar good for 1865 villages.

The cost estimate that was in YOE (inflation included) numbers went from $1.6 to $1.7 billion - a 6% increase in a year -

The math guy is all sour grapes.

For crying out loud, this extension adds two stations, bring the line total to something like 15 between UW and the airport over 20 miles, with 100,000 riders a day. 100K a day. Sound familiar? That's what the whole damn viaduct carries, so we're getting all that in brand new, never-been-used-before capacity. Cars off I-5. Cars off Eastlake. Cars off Montlake. How could anyone possibly COMPLAIN about this? How many lanes is 100K riders? Could you build that for $1.6 billion and have it perform at the same speed level for-EVER and ever? Geez man, be happy already. And I think I heard this thing is all designed, so the costs are known. This is the re-do after the Portgae Bay debacle, right? They've been working on this for years. Next step construction.

Sour grapes? naw..... I worry about the same thing.

Lightrail *is* a good idea (I think). But you have to realize that it is basically a way to connect suburbs. It is not a inner city transit system.

And Mr. Metro, SF has inner city transit like Seattle has inner city transit. Some if it runs more frequent than metro, but damn... talk about ghetto buses. Honestly, metro has some of the finest buses I've ever been on. Metro must spend a fortune on those things...

Maybe... just maybe. I think the problem is Seattle, as a city, needs it's own transit agenty. Metro needs to "become" sound transit (or some kind of marrage) and Seattle needs to spin off it's own stuff. Metro serves king county, not Seattle. Sound transit serves "the region", not Seattle.

MUNI serves San Fransisco proper, right? Maybe that is what you are alluding to, right Mr. Math? Except Metro wins at "now with 75% less piss smell", "has actual padded seats" and "now with less frequent fist fighting" awards :-)

And clarity... nobody is dissing the light rail.



But I promise you one thing. Traffic on any of our freeways will always suck. If I5 moves 15,000/day the day before lightrail opens, it will move 15,000/day the next after. In a year, the freeway will move 16,000/day and the lightrail will move 6,000/day. Three years, freeway, 17,000/day, lightrail 20,000/day. See what I'm saying? lightrail basically "sucks up" all the new growth. It doesn't decrease freeway congestion. You could offer free passes on lightrail, and people would still drive. People always drive because it is perceved to be "free". (congestion pricing is a way to aleviate this.. see also the route from renton to puyallup)



So, dont think that after the lightrail opens, suddenly there will be no traffic on the freeway. After all, if there was no traffic on the freeway, why would you bother to take the lightrail?



The only time there will be no traffic is when gas costs $7/gallon. But that is a whole different discussion (and a whole 'nother good case for investing in lightrail today)



yes... the porter was good. okay? this thing lies about preview too..

@43. Perish the thought. My point was basically that we shouldn't be complaining about this great news. We should be cheering. Seems like the math bloke would rather we not have it built. That strikes me as the height of lunacy.

And as you point out, the line will perform at speed - and add market share - in perpetuity. while the adjacent freeway will bog & clog as always.

This is just really good news. A rare thing these days.

It is good news indeed Sir Clarity. Very good news.

I cannot wait until Seattle gets bragging rights with it's lightrail.

But like Mr. Math, I think I worry about what it might do to sprawl. Lightrail doesn't stop sprawl. In many ways, it almost makes it easier. Once people forgo driving, if you replace "car" with "lightrail" for long haul routes to "the big city", you get the same thing you got with freeways.

I'm all about good urban design. Lightrail is not a component of the urban landscape. It is a way for "tourists" to come work and visit the urban scene. The only way you can get urban landscapes is with asshole mayors who dont listen to people who write letters about "waahh... please help the crocodile" and "waaah... my single story bar". I dont know if our mayor fits that description, but I will say that he is the only guy who is enough of a bastard to let this city finally grow in it's downtown core, despite the whining I see from "save old seattle" stickers. Maybe even he isn't strong enough to fight all the NIBMY's in this city. Dunno....

But it is good news. And I dont think I, and I hope not Mr. Math, think lightrail is a bad deal. You just have to be realistic. Sometimes being realistic sucks :-(

It'll be real nice to reliably take 30 minutes to go to and from work.

When the express buses stop for the day.

Or don't run in the right direction.

Or are stuck in stadium traffic.

Or are rerouted because of some stupid computer gli-- aw, fuck, well nothing's perfect.

Hmmmm. Aside form wondering why on earth I am awake at this hour, i wonder about the sprawl comment @45. The point made was LRT = sprawl. I don't think so, but let's review the line and see.

Starting in the south, we have a line with stations in Sea-Tac and Tukwila, then it crosses into Seattle. OK, three municipalities so far. One with, as the story says, the three biggest job centers in the region and another with an international airport. So far so good. Next the line has stations at Rainier Beach, Othello, Columbia City and Mt Baker, four neighborhoods in the Rainier Valley. From there it's on to Beacon Hill, west into Sodo via a tunnel, and a station next to the sports stadia. Then into downtown, with four stations in the commercial core serving Chinatown, Pioneer Square, Rainier Square, Westlake, and Belltown. top it off with today's news, Cap Hill and UW.

By my count that's 3 cities, 11 or 12 neighborhoods within our city limits, the major sports venues, the major job centers, and the airport. And what, half the stations are in subway tunnels? Heck, throw in the SC monorail and the SLUT, you have two more neighborhoods connected. Not that I'm, er, plugging the SLUT. That looks like a pretty good recipe for density.

"The Sound Transit web site used to list how many minutes light rail would take from stop-to-stop, and I remember that Capitol Hill to the U District took more time on light rail than the 43 bus on off-peak times. It was at least 10 minutes but I don't remember the exact number."

Jamier, like your clueless friend do the math, you have a curious habit of basing all your opinions on bad information. If you actually got on the 43 one day (bus proponents never seem to be bus riders - curious, no?) you would quickly figure out your recollection is actually pure fiction. Of course "you don't remember the exact number." That's your life in a nutshell.

And how's about the 'whining man's whiner' - sceptic - who believes a 15 second high speed elevator ride = "forever." These pathetic and lazy urban crybabies always come to the same conclusionC "you mean I have to get off my fat stoner ass and walk??!"

Go to cities inhabited by mature humans, and you won't find idiots like jamier, do the math or sceptic nitpicking their way through laughable and childish arguments.

But hey, everybody needs a hobby. Especially the broken men who live under rocks, live in the city...and fear people.

"The Sound Transit web site used to list how many minutes light rail would take from stop-to-stop, and I remember that Capitol Hill to the U District took more time on light rail than the 43 bus on off-peak times. It was at least 10 minutes but I don't remember the exact number."

Jamier, like your clueless friend do the math, you have a curious habit of basing all your opinions on bad information. If you actually got on the 43 one day (bus proponents never seem to be bus riders - curious, no?) you would quickly figure out your recollection is actually pure fiction. Of course "you don't remember the exact number." That's your life in a nutshell.

And how's about the 'whining man's whiner' - sceptic - who believes a 15 second high speed elevator ride = "forever." These pathetic and lazy urban crybabies always come to the same conclusionC "you mean I have to get off my fat stoner ass and walk??!"

Go to cities inhabited by mature humans, and you won't find idiots like jamier, do the math or sceptic nitpicking their way through laughable and childish arguments.

But hey, everybody needs a hobby. Especially the broken men who live under rocks, live in the city...and fear people.

"The Sound Transit web site used to list how many minutes light rail would take from stop-to-stop, and I remember that Capitol Hill to the U District took more time on light rail than the 43 bus on off-peak times. It was at least 10 minutes but I don't remember the exact number."

Jamier, like your clueless friend do the math, you have a curious habit of basing all your opinions on bad information. If you actually got on the 43 one day (bus proponents never seem to be bus riders - curious, no?) you would quickly figure out your recollection is actually pure fiction. Of course "you don't remember the exact number." That's your life in a nutshell.

And how's about the 'whining man's whiner' - sceptic - who believes a 15 second high speed elevator ride = "forever." These pathetic and lazy urban crybabies always come to the same conclusionC "you mean I have to get off my fat stoner ass and walk??!"

Go to cities inhabited by mature humans, and you won't find idiots like jamier, do the math or sceptic nitpicking their way through laughable and childish arguments.

But hey, everybody needs a hobby. Especially the broken men who live under rocks, live in the city...and fear people.

Keep in mind: when the professional anti-rail whiners and cranks complain about how Sound Transit's projects aren't "cost-effective" - always keep in mind, it's not the lack of effectiveness the right wing jihadistsbleft-wing anti-anything-new populists fear the most.

What scares the "we hate Seattle" (thus we live in Seattle) set the most is actually the opposite. Their real fear is rooted in the notion light rail will be wildly successful here (no duh), and that success will (gasp!) cause us car-loving Seattleites to get out of their cars, and flourish in human-scaled communities.

Best Christmas present EVER!!!! And it totally cheered me up but I will take my transporter over your jet pack!

Um, they still need another $700+ million. The state thinks they can get it, but the Feds have given no further indication that they're gonna float them the remaining money.

Plus, there's no timetable on when the University line would be completed.

The ST approach does not help create a dense urban environment but rather allows for a spread out mid density metro area. The area right around the stations if zoned up will have spot density where well off people will buy condos and a few affordable 300 sq. ft. studios will allow mid incomes to be near. If the LR works as the holy railers tout then the areas mearby will gain value and price out mid and low income. Because the trains will go 70 miles in a line not crisscrossing the city like all real transit systems do, there will not be a density dynamic. Federal Way will add some people but it won't become urban and the same for most of the line. After 50 years we will not have a system that could be put in the same book of transit routes as real transit cities.

Holy railers attack anyone that doesn't cheer when any track is funded, proposed, laid (not talking about the SLUT)or opened. The fact is that LR has not shown that it makes a significant impact outside of raising values near the stations. Not one of the light rail cities has as much transit use as Seattle. Read the pro rail report below:

http://www.apta.com/research/info/online/documents/rail_transit_summary.pdf

The LINK line will allow people to work and live farther apart - some may think that's a good thing and maybe it is but to me increasing the amount of travel miles is counter to the ultimate goals including reducing energy consumption. Electricity is mainly produced locally by hydropower but "wasting" it here means more GHG produion somewhere else.

Now the ST people on this list will shout and call names but they won't make a numbers based argument to refute.
They treat LR as if it were air, one must have it cost is not an issue. The fact that LR here is 3 times as expensive as anywhere else doesn't mean anything, you gotta breathe. ST saying that after spending $23 billion YOE and 20 years of building in 2030 37,500 riders would have been added transit users doesn't seem like a prudent expenditure.

As for the comparisons to highways which I have never suggested should be increased or even replaced, Clarity you muddy the discussion. Comparing the use of a twenty mile rail system with 16-20 stops to the use at one point of a highway is specious. People get on and off of 99 at various points so the "ridership" would be well above the 110,000 that use the viaduct. ST will carry what percentage of total trips? What pecentage of total passenger miles?

If we were building an urban transit system the helped make a real dense urban living area I'd support it. Look at this line and compare it to any good transit system and then tell me you see a similarity.

Ride the Seattle-PT PO ferry and support PT!

To recap the discussion:

1. rail works. Fast. If grade separated.

2. What we are proposing here w/ ST2 isn't the best configuration
.......stretching 70 miles out to Fife and Mill Creek without hooking up West Seattle, Seattle Center, Ballard and other close in places like Southcenter, Renton, Kirkland?

Why would unserved areas vote to tax themselves for service they dno't get?
Not sure metro transit has ever been builty on this partial-service, limited-coverage, discirminatory basis.
WE don't talk about public schools or national health care that would cover only 20% of the population yet tax everyone.

3. Yes if you live on Capitol Hill you just don't care -- joy for you -- you get service largely paid for by someone else.

Very rational.

3. That Capitol Hill station is not scheduled to be open for about ten more years so you will be ten years older before getting that alleged 3 minute ride.

Then, ST2 extensions by what, 2027? Then what, the other half of Seattle will get served a few decades later?

4. The issue is getting a good plan at the start and really finances and how to get a bigger revenue stream to build it closer, denser, quicker and with more complete coverage. Cheerleading/not asking questions does not help, we should have learned this by now.

4. Look at metro rail systems at urbanrail.net and see if they look like what we have proposed here.

Experience is the best teacher.
We are not experts at rapid transit in this area and we should learn globally then act locally.

Go to cities inhabited by mature humans, and you won't find idiots like jamier

Psychopath. I just said this 3 minute figure is brand new, and I've been paying attention since the beginning. I'm very pro-light rail.

Dont forget mr. math that our geographic constraints that sqeeze downtown together can make a good urban grid.

I dont think it is possible to build a transit system that supports what you are asking Mr. Math. If you mean "good urban transit" like New York, you need to elect somebody who is a major asshole to see it thought. This city would probably cry itself to death like bunch of babies while created such a system. Think of all the baby crocodile cafe's that would have to be torn down for it! Think of the single story irish bar that doesn't take credit cards that would have to go if we did it! Think of the poor starving artists! Think of the art Mr. Math!!

No sir. Not even our current mayor is enough of an asshole for a real transit solution. Lightrail, for better or worse, is all this city and state are capable of right now.

PS: I support the lightrail. None of this is whining. All I'm doing is thinking!

@54: Screw "dense urban areas." It took me a while, but I eventually caught on that "density" is just a euphemism for "expensive luxury condos." Density doesn't do anything for the middle class.

@57: Not to mention that New York's system is mostly cut-and-cover. They went through years of pain to get it -- streets all over town were torn up for long periods of time. And that was in an era when worker safety was less of a concern, and construction was cheaper. People would never stand for it here. And judging from the bus tunnel's woes, the resulting system probably would be out of order much of the time anyway.

And non-density is an euphemism for "expensive single family houses". All cities are expensive - that is a fact of life. Expensive condos aren't all the new development in Seattle. Most of what I see on the hill is priced around $300k for 600-650sqft. There are plenty in the $250k range too. The thing about dense urban areas is there are affordable options, but they are smaller than most people are used to.

As for new yorks system, it could never be done again. Too many obsticles...

@60: If cities being expensive is inevitable, as you say, then stopping sprawl is a bad idea -- it would result in the middle class being priced out entirely, instead of just pushed out to the suburbs.

@60, Yes. When I lived in New York my rent was basically similar to now, just that my apartment was smaller. In SF, it was actually less, but then I lived in a worse neighborhood.

@61, There will have to be places for people to live, so they'll live somewhere. Even NYC has affordable housing.

You can find affordable housing in any city. If your definition of "affordable" requires "big yard", "big garage", and "3000sq ft of house" than yes, move to the suburbs. My definition of affordable is "a place in the city that can fit two people and a cat". For a family, add an extra room to the equation.

In the city, your yard is a park, your garage is shared or non existent and your living room is as big as you are willing to walk.

Affordable housing is an attitude thing, not a price thing.

@63: I don't care about yards, and I don't need 3000 square feet, but 600 square feet is pretty tight quarters for three people. Especially since if you're going to fit into 600 square feet you're going to end up renting storage space somewhere else.

"The LINK line will allow people to work and live farther apart - some may think that's a good thing and maybe it is but to me increasing the amount of travel miles is counter to the ultimate goals including reducing energy consumption."

Uh, DO THE MATH, the only growth light rail stations will encourage is the density, transit & people-oriented kind of growth.

Your approach is so car-oriented, it's pathetic. You may wish to come out from under your rock some day, and acknowledge sprawl already happened. Light rail will be the only instrument to turn back our auto-designed and auto-dependent Puget Sound. Which is why the right wing auto-obsessed governance "reform" minded goons are so opposed to light rail.

If rail didn't have an impact their freeway and strip mall-inspired "pave the Cascade foothills" world view, they wouldn't be so vociferous in their opposition.

Instead, they lie to us with their constant refrain of "light rail will be ineffective." If these troglodytes actually believed that statement to be true, they wouldn't be so goddamn rabid all the time.

And, for the umpteenth time, DO THE AXE GRINDING MATH, Seattle doesn't have the tax base to build your naive vision of a Seattle-only light rail network.

"The issue is getting a good plan at the start and really finances and how to get a bigger revenue stream to build it closer, denser, quicker and with more complete coverage. Cheerleading/not asking questions does not help, we should have learned this by now."

Yeah, we learned it all from you and your actions, Cleve. Thanks for that.

"The elevator will indeed be weird. Maybe it should be an escalator that descents 150 feet instead, eh? I can only hope they dont smell like the perma-piss smell that is the bus tunnel elevators."

crk on bellevue ave, both UW Station http://www.soundtransit.org/x1758.xml and Capitol Hill Station http://www.soundtransit.org/x1756.xml feature stairs, escalators, and elevators. (see presentations w/architects' design drawings)

So, despite the comments of people-fearing basement dwellers who spend their lives whining about light rail, we won't be reduced to "tunnel dwelling rats stuck in elevators."

As for your 'piss-smell' commnents, I asked the project guy this at the open house, and anybody entering either station will be required to have a ticket. This means transients won't be wandering around in there - plus, there will be lots of cameras.

That makes sense to pay before you get on the elevator. Didn't think of that :-)

Good times ahead...

Don't waste your time on "do the math."

It's Peter Sherwin, whose math skills helped give Seattle transportation a black eye for many years to come.