April 11, 2012
Seattle Subway
The Plan to Stop Talking and Start Building Lines to Ballard and West Seattle
courtesy of seattle subway
THE PLAN Travel from downtown to Ballard would take nine minutes.
Riding the bus at rush hour from downtown to Ballard—or from downtown to West Seattle—currently takes 30 minutes, even longer in heavy traffic. If your trip requires transferring from one bus to another, it's longer still; a journey across the city can easily consume 90 minutes each direction. Metro buses stop every few blocks, they get stuck in traffic, they're infrequent, they're slow—and people avoid using transit that's infrequent and slow.
Seattle is clearly desperate for something better. Nevertheless, at our current rate of progress, building a complete light-rail network could take a century. In spite of the fact that light-rail measures always pass with flying colors on the ballot, even when it requires a sales-tax hike, the Northgate station, which voters approved in 2008, isn't scheduled to open for another nine years, and the planning for light-rail tracks to Ballard and West Seattle hasn't even begun.
Stranger Personals
We don't have to move at this glacial pace.
Really.
A group of transit nerds, working with allies in local government, are developing a way to do it and do it fast. With lines above and below grade (more than half of the New York City subway is aboveground), the Seattle Subway would transport riders from downtown to Ballard in nine minutes, according to estimates for modern subway technology. Travel from downtown to West Seattle would take 10 minutes—no matter the traffic. Trains could arrive every five minutes.
Here's how it would work: Seattle voters would take advantage of the City Transportation Authority, created by the state legislature in 2002, which was intended to fund the monorail. That authority still allows voters to establish a motor vehicle excise tax of up to 2.5 percent for "a transportation system that utilizes train cars running on a guideway." An initial vote as soon as this November or next year could pay for relatively inexpensive analysis and design work for the first line—probably to Ballard and West Seattle. A subsequent vote would pay for constructing the first line. Repeat as necessary until that map you see is complete.
"It's a great concept," says former mayor Greg Nickels, who was integral to building the light-rail lines we have. He agrees the current construction schedule for light rail is "frustratingly slow."
"We need to have a mass transit system, not just one line or two lines—a complete system—and many of us would like to see it completed in our lifetimes," says Nickels. "I don't think there is anything on the local agenda that has received better support and more regular support than mass transit. If you do the due diligence and lay out a project that people will live to see, and have accountability, I think the voters are very supportive of it."
Sound too good to be true?
After all, it seems awfully similar to the failed Seattle Monorail Project, in which activists established a new transit agency that ended in catastrophe when its bloated financing was exposed. This plan is different, Seattle Subway proponent Ben Schiendelman explains. This plan wouldn't create a separate transit agency. The Seattle Subway project would let Seattle provide more funding for Sound Transit—the regional transit authority already building light rail—and accelerate its long-range plans for the city while complementing the light-rail system we're building for the region. Most of those lines you see on this map reflect corridors that Sound Transit or the city already have in mind. Sound Transit just needs the money.
"We certainly have never resisted outside funding sources," says Sound Transit spokesman Bruce Gray, adding, "We would be the ones to do something like this, if the board and the voters decided to make it happen."
Rather than waiting four more years before even voting on a line to reach Ballard, Seattle could vote in the next 18 months. Rather than wait another eight years to vote on a second line to West Seattle, we could vote—to design, fund, and build it—within a few years. In short, Seattle could start this entire system now and "we could have everything on this map in 30 years," says Schiendelman.
The time to begin is now. Seattle's population grew by 45,000 people in the last decade, more than three times as many new residents as our largest suburb, Bellevue. The neighborhood of Ballard alone grew by 24 percent. And this is just the beginning. The Puget Sound Regional Council forecasts that the population of northwest King County (mostly Seattle) will climb by 89,000 people between 2010 and 2030—all increasing demand for an off-street subway system.
There are a few hurdles. First, a judge may need to rule that the City Transportation Authority could be used for a subway that isn't technically light rail (addressing a semantic issue in the law). Second, Sound Transit must show it has the capacity to engineer the additional lines on an accelerated schedule. Third, the Sound Transit Board would need to approve the new workload. A former board chair, Nickels says getting the board's approval may be easy, provided it "does not jeopardize projects that voters have already approved." However, King County Council member Larry Phillips, who currently sits on the board, says suburban members "could get a little queasy" if they believe that Seattle would lose its appetite to fund regional transit expansion (to suburbs) if we're already funding our own system. Schiendelman, who worked to pass the last Sound Transit expansion in 2008, counters that this project lays the groundwork to pass our next regional package.
Seattle has a strong appetite to build more, soon, and Phillips likes the idea of adding fuel to our transit system: "It makes sense to advance the planning, and if there is a funding mechanism to do it, that would be helpful. There is definitively a drumbeat for getting this done sooner rather than later." 
1
Be sure to like us on Facebook! We're at http://facebook.com/seattlesubway, and a bigger website is coming soon at seattlesubway.org.
3
Sounds like a great plan, but I have a question - would the seattle subway lines use Link technology (same system cars, etc), or would it be a heavy rail subway? My take is that the more compatible the Seattle Subway lines are with the existing (or future) regional Link lines, the better it would be for the transit rider and the more likely i would be to succeed.
4
Georgetown, really? It's a beautiful looking map, but is this trying to map to population density or hipsters?
5
Until we can get around soak-the-car-owning-Seattle-residents to fund what should be a regional (if not state wide) economic facility, this will not work.
I loves me some public transit (switched jobs just so I could ride light rail each day) but I fail to see anything other than convoluted enabling of the anti-government types with limited funding based on city residents backs.
It is outrageous that today urban residents are not only asked to ship tax dollars to anti-government suburbs and rural regions, now we are being asked to fund the economic facilities that makes it possible to do so.
I say charge a really steep toll at the city limits. And no discount for regular commuters, instead charge them a surcharge for living outside my city then coming in and taking up space.
I loves me some public transit (switched jobs just so I could ride light rail each day) but I fail to see anything other than convoluted enabling of the anti-government types with limited funding based on city residents backs.
It is outrageous that today urban residents are not only asked to ship tax dollars to anti-government suburbs and rural regions, now we are being asked to fund the economic facilities that makes it possible to do so.
I say charge a really steep toll at the city limits. And no discount for regular commuters, instead charge them a surcharge for living outside my city then coming in and taking up space.
6
Until we can get around soak-the-car-owning-Seattle-residents to fund what should be a regional (if not state wide) economic facility, this will not work.
I loves me some public transit (switched jobs just so I could ride light rail each day) but I fail to see anything other than convoluted enabling of the anti-government types with limited funding based on city residents backs.
It is outrageous that today urban residents are not only asked to ship tax dollars to anti-government suburbs and rural regions, now we are being asked to fund the economic facilities that makes it possible to do so.
I say charge a really steep toll at the city limits. And no discount for commuters, instead charge a surcharge for regularly coming into my city and taking up space.
I loves me some public transit (switched jobs just so I could ride light rail each day) but I fail to see anything other than convoluted enabling of the anti-government types with limited funding based on city residents backs.
It is outrageous that today urban residents are not only asked to ship tax dollars to anti-government suburbs and rural regions, now we are being asked to fund the economic facilities that makes it possible to do so.
I say charge a really steep toll at the city limits. And no discount for commuters, instead charge a surcharge for regularly coming into my city and taking up space.
7
As far as I can tell, Seattle Subway.org seems to think the funding for this grand scheme will come from the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny, instead of the much more likely regressive increase in the sales tax.
Seattle needed this in 1968, and blew its best possible chance for it, not once, but TWICE. Something like this would be a very logical for serious stimulus funding from the Federal government, but there's about as much chance of that happening as of any individual winning a Lotto jackpot. Especially if Romney gets elected.
Your paragraph noting the hurdles can't help but recall the Mickey Rooney movie: "We could put on a show!"
Seattle needed this in 1968, and blew its best possible chance for it, not once, but TWICE. Something like this would be a very logical for serious stimulus funding from the Federal government, but there's about as much chance of that happening as of any individual winning a Lotto jackpot. Especially if Romney gets elected.
Your paragraph noting the hurdles can't help but recall the Mickey Rooney movie: "We could put on a show!"
8
You seem to have forgotten where we live. We have three things working against mass transit in Seattle:
1) Money. (Seattle has it, but the politicians from the city and the Democrats in general believe we should send our money to all points East, North, and South of Lake Washington to people who cash our checks and spit in our hippie faces.)
2) The Seattle politicians who might support this are hapless fools. They will allow the suburban Republican politicians to tie them up in knots about taxes, whilst those same politicians insist that Seattle taxpayers subsidize their communities. Wouldn't want suburban members of the Sound Transit board to 'get a little queasy' if they believe that Seattle residents might lose our appetite for sending our tax dollars to fund their regional transit expansion in favor of doing something for ourselves.
3) The people of Seattle who never met a community enhancing project that they couldn't delay.
Now, this article adds a fourth reason. If The Stranger is for something, then the powers-that-be will rise to defeat it.
You guys should come out in favor of a surtax on all King County households making less than $200k per year, with the proceeds going directly to Jeff Bezos and Kemper Freeman as a thank you gift for allowing us to occupy the same county as them. When the State GOP rises to defeat that tax then you'll know the depths of their hatred for your publication.
I'd actually favor another legislative proposal. King County, or at least parts of it, votes to secede from Washington State. We keep our tax dollars. The rest of the state doesn't have to worry about living with us DFHs. Until that happens, we are never going to have nice things around here.
1) Money. (Seattle has it, but the politicians from the city and the Democrats in general believe we should send our money to all points East, North, and South of Lake Washington to people who cash our checks and spit in our hippie faces.)
2) The Seattle politicians who might support this are hapless fools. They will allow the suburban Republican politicians to tie them up in knots about taxes, whilst those same politicians insist that Seattle taxpayers subsidize their communities. Wouldn't want suburban members of the Sound Transit board to 'get a little queasy' if they believe that Seattle residents might lose our appetite for sending our tax dollars to fund their regional transit expansion in favor of doing something for ourselves.
3) The people of Seattle who never met a community enhancing project that they couldn't delay.
Now, this article adds a fourth reason. If The Stranger is for something, then the powers-that-be will rise to defeat it.
You guys should come out in favor of a surtax on all King County households making less than $200k per year, with the proceeds going directly to Jeff Bezos and Kemper Freeman as a thank you gift for allowing us to occupy the same county as them. When the State GOP rises to defeat that tax then you'll know the depths of their hatred for your publication.
I'd actually favor another legislative proposal. King County, or at least parts of it, votes to secede from Washington State. We keep our tax dollars. The rest of the state doesn't have to worry about living with us DFHs. Until that happens, we are never going to have nice things around here.
9
5th reason: Once Rob McKenna gets elected you'll see the entire cost of the tunnel overruns shifted to Seattle.
By 2015 the City of Seattle won't have enough cash to run a toy railroad, let alone build one.
By 2015 the City of Seattle won't have enough cash to run a toy railroad, let alone build one.
10
@5/6 Why are you making the "should be" the enemy of the can be? Good luck ever getting regional money for Seattle-only transit. But rather than giving up and sulking in a corner, let's just build the thing. We have the money, the desire, and the need. We even have Sound Transit, an agency now well practiced in the art of train building.
12
"getting the board's approval may be easy, provided it 'does not jeopardize projects that voters have already approved.'"
Since when does Sound Transit give a fuck about projects that voters have already approved?
Oh right. This is only for projects north of SeaTac.
Since when does Sound Transit give a fuck about projects that voters have already approved?
Oh right. This is only for projects north of SeaTac.
13
There are a lot of ideas to make traffic better in Seattle - but for most of them, we'd have to ask the legislature for authority. We just ended the special session with the legislature saying "no" to preserving existing bus service - much less providing new transit.
Today, we already have an option to accelerate Sound Transit - to build more of a system that we already have, and connect more of our city. Every day, we need it more - now is always the time to take the next step.
Today, we already have an option to accelerate Sound Transit - to build more of a system that we already have, and connect more of our city. Every day, we need it more - now is always the time to take the next step.
14
We're happy to answer a lot of these questions directly - please consider emailing us at contact@seattlesubway.org!
15
a one way express shuttle and back would be better and cheaper with a "high speed ferry" supplemented with the lame ass slow poke Metro sound transit? why pass all those places in between going underground? 40 riders at 3.00 for 8 rush hour trips comes out close to 20,000 a month.
all you need is some licence and a big fast gold bus with gold tinted windows and you got the gold line.
Want "me" to get your ass back and forth from Seattle to Ballard? ride the gold line that way if need be we can hit the Mc D's and grub. and or also move the gold line to a new direction like Seattle to Redmond?
all you need is some licence and a big fast gold bus with gold tinted windows and you got the gold line.
Want "me" to get your ass back and forth from Seattle to Ballard? ride the gold line that way if need be we can hit the Mc D's and grub. and or also move the gold line to a new direction like Seattle to Redmond?
16
The one that makes me moist is that purple line across town, on 45th. I told some city finance wonk, name long forgotten (personal friend of my boss), almost 15 years ago, that I wanted to see monorail running right down the middle of 45th, and he almost spit at me. I still want to see it today.
I can get downtown in a hurry now, on a bus. I can't get across town in a reasonable time for love nor money. I can drive to the airport in 15 minutes (until the viaduct comes down); even a drive from Ballard to Sand Point takes well over an hour. Ditto West Seattle to, say, Othello.
I can get downtown in a hurry now, on a bus. I can't get across town in a reasonable time for love nor money. I can drive to the airport in 15 minutes (until the viaduct comes down); even a drive from Ballard to Sand Point takes well over an hour. Ditto West Seattle to, say, Othello.
17
- However, King County Council member Larry Phillips, who currently sits on the board, says suburban members "could get a little queasy" if they believe that Seattle would lose its appetite to fund regional transit expansion (to suburbs) if we're already funding our own system.
-
So Phillips admits that Seattle is already subsidizing transit to the burbs. Seattle tax dollars already subsidize most of this state. Our own city leaders should just admit that. Seattle should quit asking for subsidies from the state to the city for projects when that is just begging for our own money. Keep it here to begin with, and let's do our own thing.
-
So Phillips admits that Seattle is already subsidizing transit to the burbs. Seattle tax dollars already subsidize most of this state. Our own city leaders should just admit that. Seattle should quit asking for subsidies from the state to the city for projects when that is just begging for our own money. Keep it here to begin with, and let's do our own thing.
18
I for one am all for lite rail and subways and such but you can't build an effective transit system by running trains on roads. Trollies are just electric busses forever stuck on one line. Then there is the existing rail line from the airport that gets stopped by stop lights, traffic and people in cars making left turns in fron of it.
wtf is that about?
I've been on the el in Chicago, sub ways in Paris, London, DC and New York.... yeah they don't stop at stop lights because they didn't build them on roads.
So yes build a subway system.... or el or hybrid, but get it off the roads or don't waste the money. Do it right or don't do it at all.
wtf is that about?
I've been on the el in Chicago, sub ways in Paris, London, DC and New York.... yeah they don't stop at stop lights because they didn't build them on roads.
So yes build a subway system.... or el or hybrid, but get it off the roads or don't waste the money. Do it right or don't do it at all.
19
I for one am all for lite rail and subways and such but you can't build an effective transit system by running trains on roads. Trollies are just electric busses forever stuck on one line. Then there is the existing rail line from the airport that gets stopped by stop lights, traffic and people in cars making left turns in fron of it.
wtf is that about?
I've been on the el in Chicago, sub ways in Paris, London, DC and New York.... yeah they don't stop at stop lights because they didn't build them on roads.
So yes build a subway system.... or el or hybrid, but get it off the roads or don't waste the money. Do it right or don't do it at all.
wtf is that about?
I've been on the el in Chicago, sub ways in Paris, London, DC and New York.... yeah they don't stop at stop lights because they didn't build them on roads.
So yes build a subway system.... or el or hybrid, but get it off the roads or don't waste the money. Do it right or don't do it at all.
20
@19 - the current light rail line is grade-separate or underground for much of the way. The part that is at-grade, through the Rainier Valley, has signal priority and its own lanes so it does not get stopped by stoplights, traffic and people in cars making left turns.
The at-grade portion is definitely less than perfect but what you're describing is just not accurate.
The at-grade portion is definitely less than perfect but what you're describing is just not accurate.
22
@16: Many have, independently, arrived at the conclusion that the "purple line" between Ballard and a U-District junction would provide far and away the most dramatic improvement to intra-Seattle mobility and connectivity, and at a fraction of the cost of anything else on that map. Hitting every major population and activity center north of the Ship Canal, without demanding new waterway crossings or downtown landtakings, keeps the price in check while still allowing us to spring for the grade separation to truly make a difference.
Unfortunately, Mr. Schiendelman, the visionary/demagogue behind "Seattle Subway," will demand that the Ballard-downtown segment MUST happen first, and will go out of his way to discredit or co-opt those who disagree, resorting to specious logic and even more specious expectations of financing. (This is someone who truly believes Seattle will be built up like Manhattan or Shanghai in 40 years time.)
The ugly truth is that Seattle lacks the funds to build the many-billion-dollar radial lines he desires - we'd be looking at $10,000+ from every man, woman, and child in the city - and that none of those long, expensive spindles would be able to demonstrate sufficient cost-benefit to earn Federal dollars. But rather than honestly debate the merits of starting with something less costly yet of uncompromising quality (unlike the dumb streetcar plans), he will shout down anyone who doesn't fall into perfect step with his "vision."
Sadly, the plan above, just like the Monorail before it, is doomed to fail.
Unfortunately, Mr. Schiendelman, the visionary/demagogue behind "Seattle Subway," will demand that the Ballard-downtown segment MUST happen first, and will go out of his way to discredit or co-opt those who disagree, resorting to specious logic and even more specious expectations of financing. (This is someone who truly believes Seattle will be built up like Manhattan or Shanghai in 40 years time.)
The ugly truth is that Seattle lacks the funds to build the many-billion-dollar radial lines he desires - we'd be looking at $10,000+ from every man, woman, and child in the city - and that none of those long, expensive spindles would be able to demonstrate sufficient cost-benefit to earn Federal dollars. But rather than honestly debate the merits of starting with something less costly yet of uncompromising quality (unlike the dumb streetcar plans), he will shout down anyone who doesn't fall into perfect step with his "vision."
Sadly, the plan above, just like the Monorail before it, is doomed to fail.
23
@20 umm yes it is accurate and does happen because regardless of how you describe it or priority it has at lights, a train cannot physically drive through a car in front of it.
I ride 4 times a week and this very thing happens at least once a week. Car making left is blocked by traffic, train has to stop and wait for traffic and car to move. So I don't know what to tell you but yeah it is affected by traffic.
I ride 4 times a week and this very thing happens at least once a week. Car making left is blocked by traffic, train has to stop and wait for traffic and car to move. So I don't know what to tell you but yeah it is affected by traffic.
24
@23 Like I said, it's not perfect, but having taken the line from Westlake to the airport at least a dozen times and down to Columbia City and back countless times, I find the train to be pretty consistent. 36-38 minutes to the airport almost every time and ~17 minutes to Columbia City.
This is not comparable to the MAX in portland or other light rail lines that routinely wait at lights or sometimes actually share lanes with traffic. Yes, what you're describing may happen occasionally (in my experience, much less frequently than you describe), but it has a minimal impact on travel times. The biggest time holding back that line is sharing the tunnel with buses.
In hindsight, I would have liked if they built the Rainier Valley portion grade-separated, but the fact is most of the line is underground or grade separated, and the at-grade part is much better than most other at-grade light rail portions.
We are in agreement, though, that the next lines should be totally separated from traffic. I'm glad North Link is mostly underground and that East Link will be grade-separated.
This is not comparable to the MAX in portland or other light rail lines that routinely wait at lights or sometimes actually share lanes with traffic. Yes, what you're describing may happen occasionally (in my experience, much less frequently than you describe), but it has a minimal impact on travel times. The biggest time holding back that line is sharing the tunnel with buses.
In hindsight, I would have liked if they built the Rainier Valley portion grade-separated, but the fact is most of the line is underground or grade separated, and the at-grade part is much better than most other at-grade light rail portions.
We are in agreement, though, that the next lines should be totally separated from traffic. I'm glad North Link is mostly underground and that East Link will be grade-separated.
25
To sum up my point - yes, Central Link is not perfect, but still very good by most light rail standards and by no means does the at-grade portion ruin it.
26
An excise tax of 2.5 percent. So, for a $40K car, that'd be $1000, per year. For 30 years or however long this takes to build.
Oh, sure - everyone will go for that.
Oh, sure - everyone will go for that.
27
Free Lunch - nobody's suggested a 2.5% excise tax. That's just the maximum authority possible. We'd ask for as much as polling showed voters would be interested in.
28
A subway in Seattle is a disaster waiting to happen. We live in one of the most geologically active areas in the United States - just because a major earthquake hasn't happened since most Seattleites moved here in the 1990s doesn't mean it's not going to happen. Surface or monorail. I'll never die riding a subway in this town, that's for sure.
30
@26: You're assuming the excise tax wouldn't decline with the car value. In fact, even the full 2.5%, which seems high, would look more like $1000 -> $850 -> $722 -> $615 -> $522 over five years. It's still steep, but let's at least be intellectually honest here.
Looking at a more reasonable 1%, we're talking $400 -> $340 -> $290 -> $246 -> $209. And I think it could be pitched to voters as "you'll save at least that much in gas by using the cool new subway."
Looking at a more reasonable 1%, we're talking $400 -> $340 -> $290 -> $246 -> $209. And I think it could be pitched to voters as "you'll save at least that much in gas by using the cool new subway."
31
An American Public Transportation Association study found that Seattlites would save 12,000/year by switching to transit. It puts those numbers in context. A Subway is the cheapest way to move people around a city (per ride). -- this is an investment that pays us back.
32
I'm a huge transit advocate, but our plate of billion+ dollar projects is pretty full...and just wait until the asks come for he next school levy ($750 million) and seawall levy ($400 million) come up, not to mention the waterfront park and mercer west. some of those last two will come from local property owners but most will not.
33
Despite the overwhelming tide of glib pessimism on this board I believe that the pursuit of this subway and/or extension of the light-rail is in everyone's best interests. Anyone who boards a bus daily in Seattle can see without a doubt that our transit system is strained. Full-to-bursting in fact. This city is in desperate need of a transit alternative and everyone feels the affects of a grid that is choked with nearly LA-like traffic.
Despite the sometimes laughably idealistic projections common among Stranger articles, the author here raises some valid points. Seattle has been urbanizing in a big way for the past thirty years. Without investing in new transit options we risk suffocating our own growth as a city; which is just bad for everyone.
Now in the environment of so many big projects underway - the light rail, the Aurora tunnel, even just fixing the mercer mess - I sincerely believe that Seattle is on the verge of another economic boom. A boom that cannot happen without significant infrastructural adjustment. Regarding some of the valid concerns raised by others on this board such as self-serving rich guys with cars and especially state money being sucked into over-stretched suburban development perhaps the only thing really standing in our way is our own sense of urban exceptionalism. If we slap on some can-do attitude and come together as a community we can move mountains - or at least scoot a train from Westlake to Ballard.
On a political note, check out this guy Evan Clifthorne running for the 36th district in Seattle. He's an all out advocate for transit and labor. If anyone can represent the common Seattlite in the state legislature, he can.
Despite the sometimes laughably idealistic projections common among Stranger articles, the author here raises some valid points. Seattle has been urbanizing in a big way for the past thirty years. Without investing in new transit options we risk suffocating our own growth as a city; which is just bad for everyone.
Now in the environment of so many big projects underway - the light rail, the Aurora tunnel, even just fixing the mercer mess - I sincerely believe that Seattle is on the verge of another economic boom. A boom that cannot happen without significant infrastructural adjustment. Regarding some of the valid concerns raised by others on this board such as self-serving rich guys with cars and especially state money being sucked into over-stretched suburban development perhaps the only thing really standing in our way is our own sense of urban exceptionalism. If we slap on some can-do attitude and come together as a community we can move mountains - or at least scoot a train from Westlake to Ballard.
On a political note, check out this guy Evan Clifthorne running for the 36th district in Seattle. He's an all out advocate for transit and labor. If anyone can represent the common Seattlite in the state legislature, he can.
34
Despite the overwhelming tide of glib pessimism on this board I believe that the pursuit of this subway and/or extension of the light-rail is in everyone's best interests. Anyone who boards a bus daily in Seattle can see without a doubt that our transit system is strained. Full-to-bursting in fact. This city is in desperate need of a transit alternative and everyone feels the affects of a grid that is choked with nearly LA-like traffic.
Despite the sometimes laughably idealistic projections common among Stranger articles, the author here raises some valid points. Seattle has been urbanizing in a big way for the past thirty years. Without investing in new transit options we risk suffocating our own growth as a city; which is just bad for everyone.
Now in the environment of so many big projects underway - the light rail, the Aurora tunnel, even just fixing the mercer mess - I sincerely believe that Seattle is on the verge of another economic boom. A boom that cannot happen without significant infrastructural adjustment. Regarding some of the valid concerns raised by others on this board such as self-serving rich guys with cars and especially state money being sucked into over-stretched suburban development perhaps the only thing really standing in our way is our own sense of urban exceptionalism. If we slap on some can-do attitude and come together as a community we can move mountains - or at least scoot a train from Westlake to Ballard.
On a political note, check out this guy Evan Clifthorne running for the 36th district in Seattle. He's an all out advocate for transit and labor. If anyone can represent the common Seattlite in the state legislature, he can.
Despite the sometimes laughably idealistic projections common among Stranger articles, the author here raises some valid points. Seattle has been urbanizing in a big way for the past thirty years. Without investing in new transit options we risk suffocating our own growth as a city; which is just bad for everyone.
Now in the environment of so many big projects underway - the light rail, the Aurora tunnel, even just fixing the mercer mess - I sincerely believe that Seattle is on the verge of another economic boom. A boom that cannot happen without significant infrastructural adjustment. Regarding some of the valid concerns raised by others on this board such as self-serving rich guys with cars and especially state money being sucked into over-stretched suburban development perhaps the only thing really standing in our way is our own sense of urban exceptionalism. If we slap on some can-do attitude and come together as a community we can move mountains - or at least scoot a train from Westlake to Ballard.
On a political note, check out this guy Evan Clifthorne running for the 36th district in Seattle. He's an all out advocate for transit and labor. If anyone can represent the common Seattlite in the state legislature, he can.
35
@30
You assume a person would own the same car for 30 years. Hybids and EVs are not cheap and there everywhere in Seattle. State is already asking them to pay an extra 100$ per year because they use less gasoline (paying less gas tax). To expect green car owners to cough up close to a 1,000$ every year, is going to be a hard sell.
You assume a person would own the same car for 30 years. Hybids and EVs are not cheap and there everywhere in Seattle. State is already asking them to pay an extra 100$ per year because they use less gasoline (paying less gas tax). To expect green car owners to cough up close to a 1,000$ every year, is going to be a hard sell.
36
One of the problems with the assertion that people will save money by riding the train instead of driving is that everyone will be expected to start paying for the train right away, when the first lines won't come online for five years, and if you're not interested in where that first line runs (Ballard to Downtown for example), you get what seems like nothing for your significant personal outlay.
That is not an easy sell.
That is not an easy sell.
37
Obviously, we don't have the money. If we had had the money, we would have built the monorail. What sank the monorail wasn't "bloated financing," it was the fact that it is impossible to construct mass transit with only a car tab fee. (The "bloated financing" came about because the Monorail refused to seek voter approval for increased funding after Sound Transit provided them with faulty data; instead, they tried to borrow against 70 years of an insufficient income, which would have cost $9 billion in interest for a $2 billion project.) Put it this way: if a local car tab alone could sufficiently fund mass transit, every city in America would have done so by now. As you can see, no city has done so. No city has ever constructed mass transit without massive federal assistance, because it's too damned costly.
38
I love this idea, but the trick will be keeping the moralists away from the reins, the sort who think the best way to build support is to shame everyone who hasn't joined yet.
39
@37,
There you go with that whole "reality" thing again.
So Ben S., how much is your back-of-the-napkin calculation for what each of these subway lines would cost - before AND after interest?
There you go with that whole "reality" thing again.
So Ben S., how much is your back-of-the-napkin calculation for what each of these subway lines would cost - before AND after interest?
40
@37 "The "bloated financing" came about because the Monorail refused to seek voter approval for increased funding after Sound Transit provided them with faulty data;"
And part of the problem came from people registering their cars out of city, protesting the 1.4% excise tax.
And part of the problem came from people registering their cars out of city, protesting the 1.4% excise tax.
41
Another money pit? jump the Sounder and dont get off until you reach Canada.
http://www.soundtransit.org/Schedules.xm…
http://www.soundtransit.org/Schedules.xm…
42
Even North Korea has trams that the people use to commute! Seattle is the last major city on the west coast to have any kind of light rail, and yet was the first to have a monorail! We're a laughing joke!
43
Ben must have some idea of the total cost by now, but withholds that, instead offering to complete some 30-40 miles (didn't say) of subway at ST prices of ~400K/mi, so let's say it's a $14B project (no interest).
Divide that by 750,000 people over 30 years gives you about $1500/household per year. Tack on interest for 30 years, and depreciation about doubles that number.
I suspect Seattle will lose its appetite for Bens grand scheme when reality sets in. Of course, Mayor McCheeze never met a big expensive rail project he didn't go ga ga for.
Divide that by 750,000 people over 30 years gives you about $1500/household per year. Tack on interest for 30 years, and depreciation about doubles that number.
I suspect Seattle will lose its appetite for Bens grand scheme when reality sets in. Of course, Mayor McCheeze never met a big expensive rail project he didn't go ga ga for.
44
The only way city planners would sign on to this project is if it were completely underground, had an undisclosed and unlimited budget, and would address half of current capacity loads. Write those into the plan and Conlin will sign off!
45
"we could have everything on this map in 30 years," lolz. I'll just move to a different city. It'll be cheaper, easier, and it'll get me access to transit much faster.
46
I like how this plan looks nearly IDENTICAL to the monorail proposed network about, oh, a decade ago.
48
I think nearly everyone would love to have what is proposed, ASAP. Can do, means nothing without money. No one is going to even think about taxing themselves more until a full scale enconomic recovery is well underway. And while there are some positive signs locally, it is stll very, very fragile, and not even close to passing what would be necessary to get this done.
As others mentioned, Seattle had a few chances and they blew them. What we have now is the result. Until you can get it shovel ready and Federal Funding, it just ain't happening. We are tapped out with Sound Transit (too much for too little), and have dug a literal hole with DBT. Plus the Seawall is coming up. All this crap for others and nothing for us has left nothing for this...
Subway, take a number, and it's a high one...
As others mentioned, Seattle had a few chances and they blew them. What we have now is the result. Until you can get it shovel ready and Federal Funding, it just ain't happening. We are tapped out with Sound Transit (too much for too little), and have dug a literal hole with DBT. Plus the Seawall is coming up. All this crap for others and nothing for us has left nothing for this...
Subway, take a number, and it's a high one...
49
How about move to live close to where you work? Or find a job close to where you live. Instead of waiting decades and spending billions of dollars.
50
that ended in catastrophe when its bloated financing was exposed..
This is such a colossal bullshit line.
It ended, after five frigging votes brought about by the developers, 'cause they were boxed in to only using the financial they had to use, thanks to those jackholes of corruption, Greg Nichols, Ron Sims, Norm Rice, Ullman and that other whats-his-face mayor I always forget about.
This is such a colossal bullshit line.
It ended, after five frigging votes brought about by the developers, 'cause they were boxed in to only using the financial they had to use, thanks to those jackholes of corruption, Greg Nichols, Ron Sims, Norm Rice, Ullman and that other whats-his-face mayor I always forget about.
51
The subway is the stupidest of all possible options, which was why so many thoughtful types urged a city-wide monorail over the past three or four decades.
Numerous studies had concluded that the monorail is optimal, especially for this type of topography and geophysical region.
It costs far more to go underground, with far more disturbance to the local region, both physically and commercially.
A monorail would have been the best of all possible choices, as well as the cheapest.
This simply demonstrates that Holden is sliding....sliding....sliding....towards oblivion of useless Stranger staffers.....
Numerous studies had concluded that the monorail is optimal, especially for this type of topography and geophysical region.
It costs far more to go underground, with far more disturbance to the local region, both physically and commercially.
A monorail would have been the best of all possible choices, as well as the cheapest.
This simply demonstrates that Holden is sliding....sliding....sliding....towards oblivion of useless Stranger staffers.....
52
Gotta love you deluded fuckers. We just voted down 60 bucks a year, and now you want a 2.5% car tax for your subway fetish? Where do you get your mushrooms? I want to see in colors too.
53
The monorail failed because of a financing error. They made a mistake in determining how much money would be raised by the specified tax (the mistake was geographical). Then the board tried to hide it as long as possible. They received no political support from the mayor or the city council, so they had one last vote. It failed. This (along with the way he handled the snow storm) played a part in mayor Nickels loss.
I voted for the monorail every time, but both the technology and the financing for the monorail was flawed. The law limited the financing options, but other technology could be used. There is a reason why monorails aren't that popular world wide, while a number of different steel wheeled rail systems are. A Seattle Subway would operate above and below ground as needed. There are advantages to each approach. But a system that is the same as the existing light rail would make a lot of sense.
I voted for the monorail every time, but both the technology and the financing for the monorail was flawed. The law limited the financing options, but other technology could be used. There is a reason why monorails aren't that popular world wide, while a number of different steel wheeled rail systems are. A Seattle Subway would operate above and below ground as needed. There are advantages to each approach. But a system that is the same as the existing light rail would make a lot of sense.
54
While a functional rapid transit system, that is not beholden to stop-lights, flimsy, electric buses that fall off their wires if the wind blows the wrong way, hobbled by traffic. The system is still hobbled by ridiculously high per-use fees. $2/per trip, not graduated by distance of trip or with monthly pass-rates that are discounted for those who use transit heavily (ie. daily) is a huge mistake. The cost to use the metro to and from work, would cost me $80+/month, whereas the use of my small, relatively efficient old car costs me a max of $20/month and has a fairly hefty utility of allowing me to get the f-out of city when I want. The additional windfall of the $60/month I don't spend (and the ENORMOUS of TIME saved) more than makes up for the largely insignificant costs of maintaining a 12 year old 4 cylinder manual transmission car. With faster, transit, and a system that rewarded heavy use of public transit, (like most larger cities that value public transit), I would probably use it more regularly.
Otherwise it's a waste. Another failure of imagination is to think that public transit is supposed to turn a profit. That has never been the case and doesn't have to be. The social benefits of a successful and heavily used transit system pay for themselves.
Otherwise it's a waste. Another failure of imagination is to think that public transit is supposed to turn a profit. That has never been the case and doesn't have to be. The social benefits of a successful and heavily used transit system pay for themselves.
56
@54, maybe the "failure of imagination" is to want to install rail at all. Subways, light rail, etc., are built around a concept of cities as they existed in the 1950s and '60s, when a far higher percentage of work, commerce, and recreation was concentrated downtown.
Today, "the city" is decentralized, yet we still have mass transit "imagination" focused 50 to 60 years backwards. To top it off, those who advocate all of this actually have the nerve to call themselves "progressive."
Today, "the city" is decentralized, yet we still have mass transit "imagination" focused 50 to 60 years backwards. To top it off, those who advocate all of this actually have the nerve to call themselves "progressive."
57
One of the dumbest articles on The Stranger, ever. This isn't even close to news, it's just random bloviating. there is NO CHANCE IN HELL of Seattle having a subway system in 10 or 20 years.
Got to love the logic: monorail failed in part because it required creation of new public agency, and a subway wouldn't: just use the agency created for the subway! Monorail system shut down because it's too expensive? Just max out the potential revenue sources for that project and (hopefully) pay for this, so simple.
Ugh. what a waste of paper.
Got to love the logic: monorail failed in part because it required creation of new public agency, and a subway wouldn't: just use the agency created for the subway! Monorail system shut down because it's too expensive? Just max out the potential revenue sources for that project and (hopefully) pay for this, so simple.
Ugh. what a waste of paper.
58
@57:
Sound Transit, in 08s ST2 vote, already allocated money for studying these corridors and getting cost estimates. However that money won't begin to be put to use until 2017 at the earliest, and it will be spread out over even more years.
Seattle Subway is about collecting the money for the studies NOW, getting started on those studies NOW, so whenever ST3 comes around we can hit the ground running with construction instead of waiting 5 or 10 years for studies and analysis.
Sound Transit, in 08s ST2 vote, already allocated money for studying these corridors and getting cost estimates. However that money won't begin to be put to use until 2017 at the earliest, and it will be spread out over even more years.
Seattle Subway is about collecting the money for the studies NOW, getting started on those studies NOW, so whenever ST3 comes around we can hit the ground running with construction instead of waiting 5 or 10 years for studies and analysis.
59
Seattle Subway is about collecting the money for the studies NOW, getting started on those studies NOW, so whenever ST3 comes around we can hit the ground running with construction instead of waiting 5 or 10 years for studies and analysis.
This is just an effort to make sure that no one figures out the uncomfortable truth, which is that the city government has way, way too many planners on its staff, and that they have far, far too little to do.
Time for someone to swing the budget ax at City Hall. Instead of letting the streets go to shit, why not fire half the planning staff? Yes, I know: They are white, college educated, and so articulate. But they don't actually DO a single fucking thing.
We have real needs in Seattle, and a money shortage. Why the fuck are we paying so many city planners to produce nothing but worthless reports?
This is just an effort to make sure that no one figures out the uncomfortable truth, which is that the city government has way, way too many planners on its staff, and that they have far, far too little to do.
Time for someone to swing the budget ax at City Hall. Instead of letting the streets go to shit, why not fire half the planning staff? Yes, I know: They are white, college educated, and so articulate. But they don't actually DO a single fucking thing.
We have real needs in Seattle, and a money shortage. Why the fuck are we paying so many city planners to produce nothing but worthless reports?
60
@58 I really couldn't give a shit about a study if you know in advance it's meaningless. Subway will cost more than monorail would and that was too expensive before "this economy". Straight up, there is no local money to build a subway system.
@59 I'm also a planner (in NYC, not Seattle) and I can assure that the problem isn't "too many" planners sitting around getting board. The impetus for this dream process is coming from outside the government structure and should really just be ignored alltogether.
@59 I'm also a planner (in NYC, not Seattle) and I can assure that the problem isn't "too many" planners sitting around getting board. The impetus for this dream process is coming from outside the government structure and should really just be ignored alltogether.
61
@60, in Seattle we get a steady stream of detailed "plans" from the city government for pie in the projects that will never be funded. At the same time, the physical infrastructure here is falling apart. If the planners can hold shovels, great. Otherwise, fire the planners and hire some more street repair crews. More concrete, less paper.
62
I want the t-shirt!! Great graphic courtesy of Seattle Subway. Has anyone made that t-shirt yet? It should read:
SEATTLE SUBWAY: WELCOME TO THE 20TH CENTURY. Then I can wear it whilst commuting on my bike--the only reliable and timely way to get anywhere West-East in this town (ala the "purple line." Did a transportation engineer named Harold draw that purple line??)
Then people in cars stuck in traffic, trying (or not trying) to run me over can meditate on this amazing concept called public transportation and wonder why we and they and all of Seattle let 100's of opportunities to create this masterwork of engineering pass us by. Gimme the t-shirt.
SEATTLE SUBWAY: WELCOME TO THE 20TH CENTURY. Then I can wear it whilst commuting on my bike--the only reliable and timely way to get anywhere West-East in this town (ala the "purple line." Did a transportation engineer named Harold draw that purple line??)
Then people in cars stuck in traffic, trying (or not trying) to run me over can meditate on this amazing concept called public transportation and wonder why we and they and all of Seattle let 100's of opportunities to create this masterwork of engineering pass us by. Gimme the t-shirt.
63
fetish:
Seattle has a subway line under construction right now, in Capitol Hill and the U-district. We believe the right choice today is to get the same system expanded to the hundreds of thousands of people in West Seattle and Ballard who are fighting traffic every day.
Seattle has a subway line under construction right now, in Capitol Hill and the U-district. We believe the right choice today is to get the same system expanded to the hundreds of thousands of people in West Seattle and Ballard who are fighting traffic every day.
64
If the suburban people don't want to pay taxes to support a Seattle Transportation infrastructure then let's charge them extra to drive into Seattle and park here. Every tax paying resident gets a special sticker that allows them to use special local-only discounted parking spaces. Out of Seattle commuters pay double what few spaces are permitted for non-resident parking. The extra income goes into funding subways and elevated trolly lines, and perhaps elevated special bicycle viaducts and new bike routes. And we build Park & Ride lots at city limits that charge extra to non-residents. They take the trollies into urban core and neighborhoods. And residents get a discount of rapid transit by buying monthly passes.
Build it and I'll give up my car.
Build it and I'll give up my car.
65
@16 -- Totally agree, don't underestimate the extra transit potential of this line due to the simple fact that car transportation on this route sucks at all times of day.
To pare this plan down to something feasible (meaning potentially cheaper than the monorail) but still ambitious enough to get support, fund 15th NW to Brooklyn, and a surface line on Fauntleroy that joins Link at Lander station. If that's too many trains running through SODO, elevate the southbound tracks through SODO too. Don't ask for funding for a second line through downtown until you show success elsewhere that gets people excited.
@64 -- I'd support this. The city can't toll I-5 or 99, but we can do congestion tolling the minute people leave them.
To pare this plan down to something feasible (meaning potentially cheaper than the monorail) but still ambitious enough to get support, fund 15th NW to Brooklyn, and a surface line on Fauntleroy that joins Link at Lander station. If that's too many trains running through SODO, elevate the southbound tracks through SODO too. Don't ask for funding for a second line through downtown until you show success elsewhere that gets people excited.
@64 -- I'd support this. The city can't toll I-5 or 99, but we can do congestion tolling the minute people leave them.
66
The monorail extension was unfortunately a financing debacle. The concept was great: a small footprint (a parking spot) for a pillar, constructing pillars off-site (less traffic displacement), far quicker construction than light rail (it would have been done years if not a decade before light rail from the current expansion). I'd hope we could see similar advantages from this.
67
I'd hope that this group could get the similar advantages that the monorail extension had vis-a-vis Link light rail: (1) small footprint, i.e. the pillars would have taken up the equivalent of a parking spot or 2; (2) off-site construction, with the pillars then being moved in place, therefore less traffic disruption; and (3) as a result, much quicker and less expensive to construct. We would have had the monorail extensions done in a few years from now instead of a decade from now.
RSS
Twitter
Comments (67) RSS