The C Is For Congratulations: Light Rail Passes Major Test

It hardly makes sense to expand light rail simply to avoid the inconvenience of our biennial snowfall. The Metro problems I had yesterday resulted not from stuck buses but a lack of capacity, as full bus after full bus passed my stop. Compared to light rail, expanding bus service is cheap. True, buses have trouble on hills in bad weather, but light rail cannot go up hills in any weather (see the monstrous energy-sucking tunnel currently being built under Capitol Hill). So don’t gloat. Reflect.

You call it foresight to move to Southeast Seattle, others call it gentrification.

When did gentrification become a four letter word?

In 1971.

Gentrification indicates that she bought a new place, or an old one and spruced it up.

I’m guessing more of a cheap rent/no credit or criminal history check sort of a situation.

Except of course she never said we should “expand light rail *simply” to avoid the inconvenience of our biennial snowfall.” She said it was “just another reason” to do so.And your anecdotal experience is irrelevant in the context of the many thousands of commuters who were stuck in buses for hours yesterday.

“your anecdotal experience is irrelevant” — But it wasn’t irrelevant to me and the many other times I have had the same experience. So she implied there are other reasons to expand it. I don’t know what she is implying, but I know what she wrote so that’s what I responded to. You’re certainly not implying light rail doesn’t have problems? Is Erica’s anecdotal evidence of one day triumphal commute irrelevant to those commuters as well? What’s your point?

Sorry, but the reference is going right over my head…

My point was the your post was full of holes because it was based on (1) a twisting of Erica’s words and (2) the incredibly fallacious claim that increased bus capacity could have solved yesterday’s problems.

And the difference between your anecdote and Erica’s is that hers was used merely to *highlight* an established fact: Link performed well in the snowstorm. On the other hand, you used an anecdote to try and *establish* a fact: that increased bus capacity would have solved yesterday’s transit woes. Read or watch any of yesterday’s news coverage documenting the many problems Metro experienced completely unrelated to capacity to understand why you shouldn’t use an anecdote to establish fact.

I’m in Columbia City – I bought a duplex because of the coming light rail. I’m happy I did. I go from door to desk in 20 minutes – can take my bike and ride home on a pretty summer evening – ride to Sounders games – or movies – dinner with friends… all at a fraction of the cost of a car. It is an alternative that we should offer throughout the City .. it was a success yesterday – it still took me 20 minutes desk to door!

This is pretty clearly not a broad claim about anything but my experience: “The Metro problems I had yesterday resulted not from stuck buses but a lack of capacity…” I do think I would have had a bus ride home if Metro had more capacity. Aurora was drivable, albeit slowly.

So, before you lecture me about reasoning, learn to read.

That’s funny since Southeast Seattle was Seattle’s original posh streetcar suburb. Maybe “re-gentrification” would be a more apt term. Plus isn’t Erica Jewish? Or don’t they count as a minority any more?

To quote Al Gore, “There’s no need to get snippy about it.”

Now, putting the sentence you just pulled from your original post back in context, you wrote, “It hardly makes sense to expand light rail simply to avoid the inconvenience of our biennial snowfall. The Metro problems I had yesterday resulted not from stuck buses but a lack of capacity, as full bus after full bus passed my stop. Compared to light rail, expanding bus service is cheap.”

Are you seriously claiming that passage doesn’t rely on an anecdote to argue that expanding light rail isn’t the solution to improving public transportation’s snowstorm performance because the problem is bus capacity, not traffic or street conditions or “stuck buses”? And what is the point of proceeding to highlight the benefits of one policy (expanding bus service) over another policy (expanding the light rail network) unless you accept as fact-proved-by-anecdote that bus capacity is the problem to be solved in the first place? Sorry, but you can’t engage in a public policy debate using nothing but a personal anecdote and then say you’re not making “a broad claim about anything but my experience.”

Bring on the gentrification to the Southeast! And trains sometimes do get stuck in snow/ice or in the case of SEPTA – leaves.

There is no money for the expansion of light rail. Or anything; Metro is cutting bus service.

Imagine how an automobile tunnel from the stadia to Mercer and Aurora could have turned things around yesterday. Now *that* is a worthy investment of $4 billion.

“My commute this morning? Ten minutes through the snow to the station, the usual five minutes’ wait at the station, then 20 minutes by rail into downtown Seattle.

I’m pointing this out not to gloat…”

Yes, you are gloating that you have a desk job. I could swear, I’ve actually seen you do field work, though.

Imagine how much money we could have saved by giving buses a lane they only have to share with 1-passenger cars, lane cheaters, broken-down cars using the lane as a shoulder, jack-knifed articulateds, and Magnolia Community Club members who have BAT lane parking stickers…

By gentrification, do you mean the influx of Somalians, Ethiopians, Sikhs, Tibetans, Vietnamese, Laotians, Mexicans, or all those Texans wearing Longhorn sports paraphenalia? Don’t the Texans know they are supposed to move north of the ship canal?

By gentrification, do you mean the influx of Somalians, Ethiopians, Sikhs, Tibetans, Vietnamese, Laotians, Mexicans, or all those Texans wearing Longhorn sports paraphenalia? Don’t the Texans know they are supposed to move north of the ship canal?

OH, and I forgot the bikes. It’s the bikers that cause all the traffic jams. Darn them.

Light rail construction is paid for through ST’s portion of the sales tax (as well as federal grants, etc). The Metro bus service is a separate pot of sales tax money.

Get used to this snowfall. It could become an annual event thanks to climate change (I think we got lucky in 2009).

The lack of capacity has to be expected as more people eschew their cars for transit in this weather, and Metro’s forced to abandon routes and coaches (like trolleys and articulated buses) for snow schedules due to the conditions.

Really, when these conditions hit, people just need to resign themselves to a citywide mess and just do what they can to get as far as they can on foot from A to B. The buses can only do so much and using your car in these conditions is akin to a suicide attempt.

No, people move to SE Seattle simply because it’s cheap and for many all they can afford to get the kind of home they want, and all the other reasons are just semi-logical window-dressing to that key fact. Given the quality of the neighborhoods in the area, it’s also clear you get what you pay for.

Well, not beyond the planned extensions anyway. There is a point here: If you want more service beyond that, you’re going to need to find the money for it.

Um, what about the people moving to Rainier Valley because it is the only neighborhood in town with decent transit (besides downtown)? John Fox and anyone who still believes his pro-sprawl economics seem to want Rainier Valley to hang out the “Unwelcome” sign for people trying to live affordably next to rail stations.

You mean, like the tunnel that is now within $200 million of being officially over budget, before the tolls get blocked or downsized?

Or SR 520, with its faith-based funding package in which the state will find $2 billion to pay for it from somewhere, we don’t know where yet?

I can’t speak for anyone else, but for me and my wife, Link is the only reason we are looking at North Beacon Hill.

Yes, price is of course a factor, but there are plenty of other places where we could move to for the amount we can afford to spend. Link is the deciding factor, even though we could get alot more space for our buck over on the Eastside.

Historically the citizens of Seattle have been very pro-transit.

My worry is not that the Mayor’s ‘Rail to West Seattle and Ballard’ won’t pass, but that it will be done too quickly and on the cheap. I’d rather we take our time and do it right than rush something through that we have to live with for 100 years.

You know what else works in snow? Me walking from my bedroom to my living room. You know what else works in snow? A can opener. You know what else works in snow? Beethoven’s Fifth. You know what else works in snow…

You know what else works in snow? Me walking from my bedroom to my living room. You know what else works in snow? A can opener. You know what else works in snow? Beethoven’s Fifth. You know what else works in snow…

What Erica wrote: Just another reason to expand the system throughout the city.

What Mikos wrote: It hardly makes sense to expand light rail simply to avoid the inconvenience of our biennial snowfall.

What Erica wrote according to Mikos: Just THE reason to expand the system throughout the city.

It never ceases to amaze me how light rail opponents feel so insecure about their position that they can never just give a straight, honest argument. They can only argue by twisting, distorting, and tossing out strawmen and red herrings. It’s like the only way they feel they can make their case is by twisting and distorting.

I agree we want a good system. I don’t think we have time to wait to do the normal Seattle 10-year debate. Given expected rises in fuel costs, need to accommodate more growth (and channel it into station areas) and desire to reduce climate emissions, an imperfect system in 5 years trumps a great system in 15.

What I hope is that the W. Seattle – Ballard system include potential for expansion in the future to Burien and Edmunds, perhaps with connections on both ends to the central Link system…

If ECB counts as “gentrification” you really have a pretty low threshold for someone being rich. Unless I’m really doing something wrong, writing for a local internet site is not the path to riches.

Hmmm… Not sure I agree with that. Yes we do need good transit now, but Rome wasn’t built in a day. I’d rather wait to get a good grade separated system that is fully integrated into (or preferably a part of) Link than a half ass one. In the short term we can build out the Seattle Streetcar Network, which can be done on the relative cheap, while we figure out how to get good frequent reliable rail to West Seattle and Ballard.

Also, keep in mind that rail to Ballard and West Seattle doesn’t automatically mean a West Seattle-Ballard line. From my understanding that would require digging a second tunnel under DT as the DSTT will be full with just Central, North and East Link once they are built out. And do we really need two tunnels DT right now, when so much of the city needs Link? I’d like to see Ballard connected into the grid via a tunnel over to Brooklyn which when ST3 comes around could then connect to Issaquah via 520 and Bellevue. This is what I mean by fully integrated, a true network and not just a bunch of different spur lines, using different technologies. We’ve got two right now, Link and the Seattle Streetcar system, no need to through some kind of MAX hybrid system into the mix IMO.

Unfortunately not my John Bailo mute button.

The Mayor has no clue how he’s going to do light rail to Ballard let alone how he will find a funding stream. My thinking is he threw that out there to see if it would stick because of course Seattlites are pro-transit to any plan that has no actual details attached.

When I spoke to him a couple of months ago and asked him how he planned to run a light rail line over the Ballard Bridge (his words) without shutting down the entire working port while it was being built, it could not have been more obvious that the idea had never occurred to him.

If light rail down a West corridor ever does happen in the Seattle area I am absolutely positive it will be long, long after McGinn’s tenure as Mayor is done.

And we all know how sales tax brings in pots of revenue. See: state budget and King County budget.

Twisted, distorted strawmen and red herrings. That’s a disturbing image.

You mean like the existing tunnel got closed by an accident due to inclement weather?

You mean like the existing tunnel got closed by an accident due to inclement weather?

Is she Jewish by religion, ethnicity, nationality or some combination of the above?

I didn’t move to SE Seattle because it was cheap. I moved to SE Seattle because it’s one of the few places in town that isn’t like living in a bottle of whiteout. I’m used to having color around me.

First of all, I’m not an opponent of light rail. I voted for it and I suspect I’m picking up a bigger part of the tab in my taxes than you are. I just don’t happen to believe it’s a solution to all our transit problems. And I don’t give a hoot if you want to quote me, but you display a tremendous amount of arrogance in attributing a claim to me that I did not make. My point was very simple. Erica claimed she had a wonderful commute thanks to light rail and I too would have had a wonderful commute if Metro had the capacity to actual get me on a bus. My other point is also simple. It is ridiculously expensive to put a light rail station on Capitol Hill.

Seriously? You think downtown and Rainier Valley are the only areas with decent transit? How many buses and soon to be light rails cross Capitol Hill again?

While I think these will get more common, I think we’re in the La Nina, El Nino swing so every other year will be cold, and then every other year warm. Or things could just be ‘a changin’.

While I think these will get more common, I think we’re in the La Nina, El Nino swing so every other year will be cold, and then every other year warm. Or things could just be ‘a changin’.

“I did show remarkable foresight in moving to Southeast Seattle”

yeah, tell us about that foresight when your kid gets assigned to Rainier Beach HS….but at least, he/she won’t be the only one at the school whose mom is a thief.

Well ECB has the criminal record, so sure she fits in well down there.

Why do you hate white people? Racist?

I am white. I’m just not interested in living in a homogeneous neighborhood.

But Seattle’s homogeneous neighborhood’s are all so liberal…look at Wallingford and Fremont. Very liberal.

What’s wrong with too many white people? Do they make you nervous?

Good luck sending your kids to Rainier Beach High School.

How’s the Franklin/Cleveland High school option treating you?

When North Link and East Link open, and no more buses run in the tunnel, it won’t get blocked by buses trying to leave Convention Place Station.

It might still get blocked by left hooks on MLK (unless ST figures out how to install physical barriers to stop the left hooks), but not by inclement weather.

Or the move could be a combination of luck and lower income.

Gentrification also indicates that it is an adventurous white person moving into an area where he/she is a minority.

Many Seattle citizens are pro-transit in the abstract. But when presented with the opportunity to vote for public transit, they have voted those measures down more often than not, e.g., forward thrust in the late 60′s and early 70′s, and a very ambitious transit proposal in the mid 90′s. Fortunately, enough of the locals finally came to their senses a few years ago and voted for S/T light rail and hopefully will support more measures in league with Fed dollars (fingers crossed) to fund more rail in the future.

Light rail is certainly a solution for the people that can use it and the more of it we build, the more we minimize the transit problems for commuters that have rail as an option.

You can have a wonderful commute in a bus up to the point that you are stuck in a sea of cars due to heavy traffic or an accident while with rail, you can ride above or beside the traffic without any impediments.

What a wonderful world Seattle would be if we had rail all over the city.

Actually, that’s exactly the claim you made.

Have they? Forward Thrust was a King County vote and barely failed. I don’t have the vote tally but I would be willing to bet that the city was more pro transit than the rest of the county.

What plan in the mid 90s are you speaking of?

How many Seattle only transit plans have been voted down?

the north south LRT line we’re building is already maxed out, so any east west line that would hook into it north of the ship canal doesn’t integrate with it. there’s literally not enough capacity to take added passengers transferring into the north south line as it will already have trains every few minutes just handling the north south passenger flow.

And there is no Seattle Streetcar system, and they only go as fast as a bus.

we voted down the monorail in 2005, because it had a revenue shortfall.

But today ST has a revenue shortfall, fairly serious one at $3.9 billion.

And the city, state and county have revenue shortfalls, too.

we’d be building that monorail line had we not done that. would have provided the transit to w seattle when viaduct comes down, or in a snowstorm. and it had the real estate in ballard to allow expansion there a few years later. ST 2.0 has already deferred federal way station, somehow, killing off that monorail revenue stream and the project was supposedly because leaders knew we needed hi capacity there and there was some other way to do it but it’s been five years and no one has a plan, Stan.

The expressions of desire for rail on the west side are vaporware. It’s not happening. We chose that.

delinkage:
My understanding is that one of the reasons Link cost so much was that Seattle basically made it light Metro, including extra long platforms and large trains. I’ve read that we won’t be able to fit any extra TRAINS through the DSTT once East Link and North Link are up and running full speed, but I’ve read nothing about it being maxed out person wise. Where are you getting these stats from?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_Streetcar_Network

oopsie, I have to admit I wasn’t here for the Monorail debate, but from what I have read it was a very very complex situation and not merely a ‘revenue shortfall.’ In fact if it had to be simplified to a one liner “Financing plan based on rainbows and unicorn farts” would be a better description of what killed the monorail.

Hah! Reading comprehension is still not your strong suit.

The first version of the current Sound Transit line was defeated at the polls in 1995, and many cite the fact that a surface alignment was still an option for vote-rich NE Seattle as being a significant factor in its defeat.

Mr. X, not trying to be argumentative, I didn’t come here until 07 so my knowledge from that era is far from complete, but was that a city vote or a Sound Transit area vote?

That’s a few years down the road. I am an AmeriCAN, and I want my gratification now!

The mayor should take homage in the reality that the only people calling the mayor a liar for his promise of a vote on light rail to West Seattle are 1) not really in favor of light rail to West Seattle, and 2) looking for lame excuses to bash the mayor and his transit agenda.

I agree, Link is the only reason anyone with more than two nickles to rub together would move to North beacon hill.

I wouldn’t go that far. Link was what got us to look at it, but it doesn’t seem that bad. I’ve been following some blogs and doing other research and the Red Apple right across from the station and the Library Annex are pretty nicely located. Although I don’t see a whole lot of restaurants/pubs/cafes near the station (the area where I am looking at) but hopefully that will come as the density starts to rise.

I think you’ll be pleased with your choice, Anc.

That was one of our top picks, but we were already getting priced out.
And when the economy kicks into gear you’ll be swimming in amenities.

Barleywine, I think we will be too. The places we can afford near where we want are pretty small… like 7-900sqf but it’s just the two of us (well and two cats), and I’ve spent the majority of my 28 years sharing a room with someone, be it my brother, dorm rooms (7 years) or barracks so I don’t need alot of space. In fact the place we have now feels a little too big, and that’s with turning a couple of room into just storage.

No one seems to consider the fact that for the SLUT street car line, with an assumed interest rate of 6%, a bit high today for current AAA/aa bonds, the price PER rider is computed at $25.63 assuming a 30-year bond and an annual maintenance cost of $2 million.

That ain’t hay. Any bus system is far cheaper.

It is the very reason the monorail system got junked – long term debt plus annual maintenance costs.

And, back to the original Forward Thrust light rail plan, recall that its price of $1.3 billion was equal to the TOTAL urban mass transit administration (UMPTA) budget for the ENTIRE US! It was jettisoned by the King County voters for one reason – PRICE. It was designed by the well recognized consulting firm of DeLeuw Cather headed up in Seattle by Israel Gilboa, a respected light rail engineer. But, glitz did not carry the day.

For short – be careful of any street car system you may dream about. They are slow, cumbersome, are deadly to traffic capacity, and are not as efficient as electric trolleys, even if you ignore total cost. This is especially true if electric trolleys run in their own right-of-way. They are still cheaper and, like LRT, don’t pollute.

That’s about it for now. See ya.

Verd1n

The 1st version of S/T in 1995 that Mr. X mentioned. It was a pretty big price tag that I believe caused seattlites to resort to their usual penny pinching voting down of big ticket items even when they provide great social benefit.

The 1968 Forward Thrust vote was 51-49 in favor. What kept it from not carrying the day was the state’s supermajority requirement. It was in a special February election; it would have been interesting to find out what would have happened in a general election vote.

I have a copy of the DeLeuw Cather report–their lines even today would be well-situated.

Wrong ding-dong. But admitting you’re wrong is definitely not your strong suit.

Look, if Erica says Fact A is “just one more reason” to pursue Policy A and you say it’s dumb of her to say Fact A is “the” reason to pursue Policy A then you are most definitely twisting her words. Not to be rude, but if you don’t get that you have a real problem with basic logic.

Still wondering why it’s bad for minorities to move into a neighborhood.

Snow and ice are solvable problems with rail, for instance by using heated switches. You’d need something like heated roads to solve this problem for buses.

(not that this matters too much in Seattle – I see this as a minor benefit, but a benefit nonetheless. then again, Seattle booted our last mayor because of snow issues, so maybe we value mobility on our few snow days very highly.)

I’d be curious what ridership numbers you’re using for that $25.63 per rider number. We’re not even done with the first few rounds of SLU buildup yet, and I believe ridership has increased consistantly since it’s construction.

But even at $25 a rider, that’s not a bad deal for a long term system. Consider that although the trains might need to be replaced after 30 years (though they probably will last much longer than that, and should far outlast even an electric bus in lifespan and maintenance), the system as a whole can last hundreds of years without being replaced. That $25 per rider starts scaling back pretty quickly when you remove capital costs from the next 30 years, and the 30 years after that, and the 30 years after that… Plus if we build upon this system each next segment becomes comparatively less expensive.

Regarding trolley buses vs. streetcars, I’m agnostic. I think buses are cheaper in the short term, and streetcars are cheaper in the long term. But the real efficiency comes when you look at path separation. We could use a lot more of that whether we stick with buses or upgrade to rail.

What’s this thief business about? And it seems more than a bit biggoted to call Rainier Beach mothers thieves. To be clear, which are you associating with crime – skin color or income levels?

The reasons are semi-logical window dressing. There’s a lot of “color” in the U District or Capitol Hill. Those neighborhoods also have terrific transit. And no rail stations. Also, funny someone would call an area with one sprawling, sketchy major bus line, a handful of spotty connection lines and a couple of rail stations one with “decent transit”. Curiously inconsistent tacit definition. Or that someone would move to a neighborhood with virtually no amenities just because it has a Link station. Capitol Hill will have a Link station in a couple years. Why not live there? They actually have places to go in that neighborhood.

Again, semi-logical window dressing. Housing’s cheap down there, and the area’s sprawling, sketchy and not that walkable or well-connected between neighborhoods.

The reasons are semi-logical window dressing. There’s a lot of “color” in the U District or Capitol Hill. Those neighborhoods also have terrific transit. And no rail stations. Also, funny someone would call an area with one sprawling, sketchy major bus line, a handful of spotty connection lines and a couple of rail stations one with “decent transit”. Curiously inconsistent tacit definition. Or that someone would move to a neighborhood with virtually no amenities just because it has a Link station. Capitol Hill will have a Link station in a couple years. Why not live there? They actually have places to go in that neighborhood.

Again, semi-logical window dressing. Housing’s cheap down there, and the area’s sprawling, sketchy and not that walkable or well-connected between neighborhoods.

“What’s this thief business about? ”

Just try posting anything with the words ‘Erica, w!ne, b@ttle, sh@plift’ here at publicola.

Ah, got it. A personal attack. Classy.

No reason to get snippy.

Matt, this guy’s real name is Fred/Tony/Tim/Oscar, and he was obviously unloved as a child. He’s the anti-classy.

This is the best reason to hug your kids constantly. We don’t need another like him in the world.

Umm… People aren’t required to have kids once they have set up a nest.
At least thinking people don’t.

Presumptuous much?

I would like to point out that King County Metro and Sound Transit are completely separate entities that receive their funding from equally seperate sources.

Yep. That sales tax model is also the foundation that Fair Tax that Libertarians are so certain will be cure-all of our nations financial ills.

Take notice Paul-tards.