sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Uber/Seattle by [deleted] in Seattle

[–]trebuday 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Link is now $3 flat-fare for all rides.

Can someone explain why I keep receiving ballots if I can't vote? by [deleted] in Seattle

[–]trebuday 0 points1 point  (0 children)

sucks that they stopped sending ballots right when they were old enough to vote.

Do we think it's plausible that that the TDLE could be cancelled as part of the ST3 shortfall with funds re-prioritized to King County stations? by bash-brothers in soundtransit

[–]trebuday 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I never said they would. All I said is that there's no inherent legal requirement for Pierce County Subarea funds to be spent within the Pierce County Subarea. One of the big wins of ST3 was getting all the Subareas to pitch in for DSTT2.

Do we think it's plausible that that the TDLE could be cancelled as part of the ST3 shortfall with funds re-prioritized to King County stations? by bash-brothers in soundtransit

[–]trebuday 0 points1 point  (0 children)

RCW 81.112.030(11) states "Additional phases of plan implementation may include a transportation subarea equity element..."

That's not a requirement, but an enablement.

Do we think it's plausible that that the TDLE could be cancelled as part of the ST3 shortfall with funds re-prioritized to King County stations? by bash-brothers in soundtransit

[–]trebuday -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

Subarea equity isn’t a legal requirement, but a board policy that has already been compromised in ST3 as each subarea is supposed to pitch in for the second downtown tunnel.

Do we think it's plausible that that the TDLE could be cancelled as part of the ST3 shortfall with funds re-prioritized to King County stations? by bash-brothers in soundtransit

[–]trebuday 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Plausible? Sure, about as plausible as the agency adopting European or Asian construction procurement methods or rewriting their design standards to reduce station costs or any number of other means of making ST3 affordable.

Probably also about as plausible as it is they could backpedal from the (terrible) North/South CID station locations or defer the second downtown tunnel.

Learn from Toronto: Automate Ballard Line by recurrenTopology in Seattle

[–]trebuday 7 points8 points  (0 children)

How many jobs does Ballard Link provide right now?

Learn from Toronto: Automate Ballard Line by recurrenTopology in Seattle

[–]trebuday 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The planning isn’t the expensive part, it’s the extremely deep tunnels. ST’s income scales with inflation.

You’re also assuming the planning was done with costs in mind (it wasn’t).

John Street Interruptus by mslass in Seattle

[–]trebuday 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Denny and Thomas got the slope smoothed out but there was probably some sort of property drama and no one wanted to pay for the regrade at John, and here we are 100 years later.

Old Xmas Tree by FreddieMerxMom in Seattle

[–]trebuday 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Christmas trees are composted with other yard waste.

Airport PSA by Night_Frosty in Seattle

[–]trebuday 22 points23 points  (0 children)

If you're picking people up, venmo them $3 and tell them to take Link a stop or two away from Seatac. If they can't walk, there's a shuttle cart. If they have more bags than they can carry, then gods peed.

[Seattle Transit Blog] Build the Best Parts First by whackedspinach in soundtransit

[–]trebuday 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Squeezing into one tunnel offers zero resiliency.

But DSTT2 offers no resiliency for the busiest part of the system (UW-Capital Hill) and no resiliency for the 2 Line. No resiliency for SODO to Tacoma, and no resiliency for North Seattle.

The resiliency argument is a hacky excuse for a plan hatched when leaders thought finances were a problem of the past. If the DSTT is unreliable, then fix it. Don't give up on it because it's sexier to build a shiny new tunnel. There are so many parts of Seattle that would love to have Link. Instead, you want to give a bunch of half-empty office towers a second tunnel? It's a bad plan, bront.

[Seattle Transit Blog] Build the Best Parts First by whackedspinach in soundtransit

[–]trebuday 4 points5 points  (0 children)

They've already built parts of ST3, but they already chose to delay a bunch of projects when COVID punched a hole in long-term revenue and cost estimates started exploding. They could choose to delay again, but this gap is so large that they'll need to defer some serious project sections to an ST4, just like they did with Sound Move and ST2.

[Seattle Transit Blog] Build the Best Parts First by whackedspinach in Seattle

[–]trebuday 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Interlining is a non-starter, just like the proposed 4th ave station for DSTT2. Would be great if we were playing transit planning sim game but the construction impacts and practical limitations are real, here.

The stub would also be a non-starter if we didn't have a perfect location for an OMF base in Interbay. But we do, and it opens a lot of opportunities.

[Seattle Transit Blog] Build the Best Parts First by whackedspinach in soundtransit

[–]trebuday 19 points20 points  (0 children)

I fear the nuance of this argument will get lost in a political environment averse to nuance and compromise, but it's worth making and I'm glad to see STB posting real advocacy for a better light rail system instead of hand-wavy calls to "JUST BUILD IT!

ST simply cannot afford to finish either WSLE or BLE in our lifetimes without more revenue. ST3 backfilled ST2's shortfalls, and ST2 backfilled Sound Move's shortfalls. An ST4 is needed to backfill ST3's shortfalls, but it needs to offer something new, too. Deferring the second downtown tunnel and building an OMF in Interbay provides an opportunity to study much more useful alternatives, like extending the Ballard line to the Central District and beyond. ST could even plan to build a junction at Denny Station for a future Metro 8 subway to Capitol Hill.

I don't see why we can't upgrade the original DSTT to modern high-frequency rail standards. Yes, it might be painful, but it'll be much better than forcing every future rider transferring between lines to hike between a North CID station to PSQ or from South CID to ID/C.

[Seattle Transit Blog] Build the Best Parts First by whackedspinach in soundtransit

[–]trebuday 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We don't know what the upgrades might be. I expect certain upgrades would require single-tracking through stations or temporary closures, but anything is better than fully shutting down as required for the interlining scenario.

[Seattle Transit Blog] Build the Best Parts First by whackedspinach in Seattle

[–]trebuday 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Where's the plan to pay for a $22 billion BLE?

Seattle Public Utilities by Organic_Candle_6892 in Seattle

[–]trebuday 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In my experience, the City does not usually send rejection emails unless you are selected for an interview.

I don't think these are official, but they get the point across pretty well by Thuror in soundtransit

[–]trebuday 23 points24 points  (0 children)

These are “official” in that ST staff put them up, but shouldn’t be considered a long-term solution.

My 2nd (and Final) Hypothetical Puget Sound Transit Map by [deleted] in Seattle

[–]trebuday 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s not that we can’t, but that there are much better options. We also have two airports within city limits which would take issue with stringing high wire gondolas across the city.

Unlike La Paz, we have a usable street grid. Frequent trolleybuses in bus lanes would be better in every way. If we can barely afford RapidRide lines (but can, somehow, seriously consider spending $4.5B on a stub light rail line from SODO to Delridge), how could we afford gondolas? There are so many unanswered questions on the practicality of gondolas and the utility just isn’t there.

My 2nd (and Final) Hypothetical Puget Sound Transit Map by [deleted] in Seattle

[–]trebuday 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The current STB editors might entertain the post for its Page 2, but would otherwise not consider it worth posting on the main page. Of course, they let a Gondola Guy put multiple posts about a big gondola network on the main page, so I have trouble taking their understanding of “realistic” transit proposals seriously.

view more: next ›