- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 29, 2013 at 1:10 am #799184
kgdlgParticipanti would self tax for light rail from west seattle, but after the monorail debacle, i am not that hopeful! right now i would take a Metro system that added capacity instead of taking it away.
October 29, 2013 at 2:30 am #799185
socamrParticipantI never know why people are all gung-ho on BRT; I’d love to hear more from people who love it.
I get that it costs less than light rail, but unless you are going to take a lane of traffic and dedicate it SOLELY to buses, then it’s never going to be rapid. Look at the so-called RapidRide – those things have to sit on the bridge to merge into Viaduct traffic, then sit on the Viaduct (the bus lines don’t extend all the way). So at rush hour the time to work is no longer rapid, and worse, it’s unpredictable (God forbid there’s an accident on the Viaduct!).
I’m with kgdlg – I’d gladly self-tax for light rail from the Junction to downtown, and I’m sure all those people about to move into those apartments will soon feel the same.
And getting back to the Mayor’s race, McGinn seems to realize better than Murray that a solution to our transportation issues has to be more than just building roads. Perhaps that’s because he’s been forced to deal with this problem for the last four years, and knows it inside and out.
October 29, 2013 at 4:06 am #799186
EdSaneParticipant“Use his strong relationship with King County Executive Constantine, Governor Inslee, the legislature and regional leaders to secure additional funding options”
….
Anyone actually believe this line? This is exactly why I won’t vote for Murray. It just enhances the idea that the only way for something to succeed in Seattle or Olympia is if we keep electing the same people (state legislature, city counsel or the school board). It’s not that he has a better idea, or a different plan. He just ‘knows’ the right people. Maybe they have a poker night too?
October 29, 2013 at 5:08 am #799187
wakefloodParticipantOk socamr, exactly where are you putting your light rail line to downtown?
You know that you either take away 2 lanes of road or you elevate it like a monorail, right? And light rail is heavier than regular rail, so the supports are huge. And that means a whole new lower bridge that would need to be movable for ship traffic. Good luck with that. Its waaay too heavy to run it on the big bridge. So your cost per mile is around $150M/mi. And thats not counting a new bridge. And it would take you the better part of a decade to secure the Right of Way at exorbitant prices, design it and get it built. If it all went smoothly.
THAT is why BRT is a better solution, especially in the hilly and highly built out east/west neighborhoods like WS and Ballard etc.
Waaaaay cheaper and actually doable.
October 29, 2013 at 5:21 am #799188
wakefloodParticipantOh, maybe you were assuming a tunnel for light rail? Of course! That’s possible. Just need elevators going down from the junction several hundred feet to below the bottom of the Duamish. This is essentially what you’re currently paying to do for the line from Capitol Hill to.the U Dist, at a cool $750M to 1B. Good luck getting that to happen before 2030.
October 29, 2013 at 5:24 am #799189
maplesyrupParticipantAt some point we’ll have to invest in some better form of mass transit like rail or subway (unless we can leapfrog to Jetsons-style transit). We can try to figure it out now, or push the decision decades forward where it’ll be even more expensive per mile.
October 29, 2013 at 5:33 am #799190
wakefloodParticipantWhy not get BRT running at a fifth of the cost with higher people volume and upgrade to full zero emission electrics in a few years when those are ready?
October 29, 2013 at 6:37 am #799191
socamrParticipantOK Wakeflood, if you agree to dedicate one lane of traffic entirely to buses, from the Junction all the way to downtown, I’m all for it. BRT should mean an unfettered bus lane all the way through – if it has to sit in traffic at any point, you’ve lost the R part, and it’s just a bus.
I’m willing to do it, but don’t sell me a cheap load of goods – if it’s BRT, it has to be real BRT and not what we have now. And since I strongly suspect that the car-happy residents of Seattle will *never* allow lanes to be dedicated solely to buses, your BRT is just throwing smaller amounts of money to not solve the problem.
I’d rather spend the money to actually solve the problem – and if it doesn’t happen while I’m commuting, that’s fine. My kids will need it someday – I’d like Seattle to still be a livable city when they grow up.
October 29, 2013 at 3:27 pm #799192
wakefloodParticipantAgreed. That’s the definition of BRT and anything less is not BRT. And for the record, I was never trying to sell you anything less – look back over my comments in any transpo discussion. You’ll see that I’ve been consistent in my definition.
This leads to a question: Since you’re looking at AT LEAST a full generation of folks trying to get off this peninsula before any subway can be built, what do you propose to cover the 15-20yr. gap of already maxed out AND exponentially growing demand in our little paradise?
Nothing?
October 29, 2013 at 3:29 pm #799193
wakefloodParticipantOr maybe you’re ok with an hour commute to cover the 5 miles from the junction to downtown? Two hours commute a day for people who can see their destination from their kitchen window? Is that livable?
October 29, 2013 at 3:46 pm #799194
JoBParticipantthe biggest problem with BRT is that it is used as a political bandage to cover the problem.. not as a short term solution to cover the gap while something better is constructed
October 29, 2013 at 3:47 pm #799195
wakefloodParticipantThe difference being?
October 29, 2013 at 3:48 pm #799196
wakefloodParticipantIf it ain’t dedicated, it ain’t BRT. Could be called enhanced bus service but it ain’t BRT.
October 29, 2013 at 4:26 pm #799197
wakefloodParticipantLet me make the issue obvious as I can. Go to the Sound Transit Projects link here: http://www.soundtransit.org/Projects-and-Plans
This is everything they’re planning for the next 20+ yrs. Much of this isn’t funded to anything close to 100% and for reference, the underground Capitol Hill to U-Dist. section which is roughly equivalent to a WS Junction to Downtown is going to cost $2B. But that isn’t what I want to focus on.
Notice what is missing? The ENTIRE WEST SIDE OF THE CITY. WS, Magnolia, Ballard, etc.
NOT EVEN A PLAN. ZIP. NADA. No dotted line, back of the envelope, maybe, we’ll see. Just silence. Effing crickets.
Why? Because it’s ridiculously expensive and the West Side is being politically punished for the Monorail.
Exactly what do the Light Rail advocates propose to change this bleak 25-30yr. future? I see people grousing enough to get ST to put a nice big dotted line along the West Side to pacify us but it won’t be anything but a PowerPoint slide for the next two decades.
That good enough for ya’ll?
October 29, 2013 at 4:35 pm #799198
wakefloodParticipantOr maybe your kid’s kids will get to vote on the Ballard extension funding. But not to worry, their kids will get to vote on the WS segment!
You think I’m kidding.
October 29, 2013 at 5:10 pm #799199
socamrParticipantIf there was legit BRT, I’d be fine with it, but like JoB, I think it’s being sold as a bandage.
Let me turn your question around – where would you put BRT? What roads are you willing to turn over to buses, with traffic lights timed to let them through with minimal stopping? What bus stops are you willing to pull out, over the cries of neighborhood protests?
For instance: Pull all parking from California between Morgan and Alaska so that buses get one lane to themselves (or ban all cars from that stretch). BRT stops in Morgan Junction, Alaska Junction, then straight to the Bridge, so one lane of the Fauntleroy onramp gets devoted to buses as well.
How many parts of this seem impossible to you?
October 29, 2013 at 5:25 pm #799200
wakefloodParticipantFirst of all, you only dedicate lanes on the Junction to Downtown segment. Everything else is feeders just like it is now. Sure, the Junction station needs to get bigger as a transit hub – but it already is one and nothing on the west side of CA is already overbuilt with 8 story condos and retail. You could build it at grade or above or even below.
From the Junction, you’ll still have an issue figuring out how to get over the high bridge but likely you’ll need to tighten current lanes and add something either down the center of Alaska/Fauntleroy or possibly to the right side down Avalon and use the Delridge ramp. Might decide to use a short overspan to eliminate a lane crossing.
I grant you it’s not a slam dunk but it can be figured out.
In short, when you don’t need to turn all of WS main streets into dedicated lanes, NONE of it is impossible.
October 29, 2013 at 5:28 pm #799201
wakefloodParticipantAnd if you’re worried about changing the “feel” of old time Alaska Junction – which, granted, may not matter a wit to you – you only need to look at what’s already underway along CA to know that it’s now an urban hub and no longer a sleepy little main street…
October 29, 2013 at 5:51 pm #799202
wakefloodParticipantAnd I should clarify. I too, want a long term solution, not a bandaid. I’m looking to get the most bang for the buck that we can sell politically and NOT eliminate the possibility of getting on the Light Rail docket before 2040.
If we get the sense that we can get 50% +/- the people-moving capacity with a limited and well-synchronized BRT for around $200M or less, then maybe we don’t eliminate the Light Rail option a couple of decades from now.
I just don’t see that WS has any other reasonable options given our physical, political and financial constraints. Ballard and WS are persona non grata when it comes to clout with ST. We’ve got to sort out something that we can sell to the rest of the city that addresses our short term needs and drive it (no pun intended) ourselves. The rest of the region wants us to shut up and move along. I don’t intend to. :-)
October 29, 2013 at 6:25 pm #799203
wakefloodParticipantIn fact, now that I think about it, ANY additional transit help for the West Side towns are NOT going to happen without some integration and locking of arms.
The rest of the region is being addressed piecemeal but they’re ALL chasing a pot of funds that will force one against the other – with ST’s Board and the KC Council deciding who wins (gets on the docket) and who loses (someday!).
Which means we really should develop a West Sider’s strategy to get in the queue. If we don’t work WITH Ballard, etc. we’re simply too divided to break into the mindspace and pocketbooks of the region.
All we have is Metro and they’re fighting to stay funded at anything close to current rates.
West Sider’s UNITE!!
Tracy, is there a Ballard Blog?? :-)
October 29, 2013 at 6:28 pm #799204
kgdlgParticipant@wakeflood, thank you! i really appreciate your informed sharing on this topic. in general, i think that the electorate in WS thinks that bringing Light Rail to our neck of the woods will be WAY easier than it will be in reality. for example, i have heard how challenging it will be to put rail on the upper bridge (from my understanding, it won’t be allowed on the lower because of frequency of maritime openings and maritime having a priority below), so BRT becomes the next most feasible option.
my question is, though, how politically feasible this really is. i mean, every time SDOT re stripes the road for bus priority, west seattlites go crazy, let alone take away a WHOLE LANE of traffic for BRT? i want to believe we will all get behind this (as a SOV driver right now, I would) but I just don’t know…maybe once all these buildings are built and the bridge is that much more congested, our collective perspective will change…
October 29, 2013 at 6:35 pm #799205
wakefloodParticipantThanks, k. I’m thinking if we solve just the few miles of Alaska Junction to Downtown with a dedicated lane and back, we get a significant chunk of improvement with the least hassle. I didn’t say it would be simple but at least it could work.
Time is of the essence and nobody will solve this for us.
October 29, 2013 at 6:36 pm #799206
WSBKeymasterPLEASE if somebody hasn’t said this already, get involved with the West Seattle Transportation Coalition.
Re: Ballard. There is http://myballard.com – owned by friends of ours who were inspired by WSB – and they do also have a forum if you want to bring up the topic there.
TR
October 29, 2013 at 6:48 pm #799207
wakefloodParticipantThanks, Tracy. I’ll head there asap and see what the plan is. :-) I’m sure there’s good thinking already in hand…
October 29, 2013 at 7:03 pm #799208
wakefloodParticipantAnd I should apologize for co-opting this mostly unrelated thread!
I write like my brain works and it’s hard to stay in my (dedicated?) lane! ;-)
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.