41st District is realigning Seattle Times, United States - 4 hours ago "By Sound Transit's own analysis, it won't relieve traffic congestion," he said. As far as his district in concerned, he said it's "not so much that it's ...

Here are a few highlights from some compelling arguments put forth by Eastside Rail Now at : http://www.eastsiderailnow.org/proposition_1_redo.html

1.   It would do little to reduce traffic congestion…”In fact, the plan could even increase congestion in some areas, such as the I-90 corridor.”

3.   Poor choices were made on selecting the rail routes.…”The most urgent need for rail transit on the Eastside by far is in the I-405 corridor (which would also be vastly cheaper than the I-90 corridor).”

4. It would downgrade some existing bus service. For example, several bus routes between Seattle and the Eastside would likely be eliminated or cut back in attempt to induce their riders to switch to the light rail line.

8.   Serious technical problems remain regarding use of the I-90 floating bridge. “Rail transit has never before been attempted on a floating bridge…”

9.   It would have an adverse effect on freight mobility. Constructing a rail line on the I-90 floating bridge would reduce the freight capacity of the region’s most important east-west road freight corridor.

14.   It is enormously expensive, despite only marginal benefits.  …”Furthermore, these are only the direct monetary costs — not included are a variety of other costs, including the opportunity costs, that is, the loss to the region from not using the same funds for more effective projects, such as lower cost rail lines with better routes.”

And here’s the kicker:

16.   It would preclude the region from taking on more worthy projects for decades. The region would become legally locked into this massive and unprecedented tax increase and its poorly planned projects for many years. Tax capacity would be exhausted for decades, and all flexibility to reduce taxes or to replace the Proposition 1 projects with more effective projects, including those that might become necessary due to changing circumstances, would be lost. 

It’s the Opportunity Cost, folks… see the link here

See their website at: http://www.eastsiderailnow.org/proposition_1_redo.html

Here is the first 10:

1.   It would do little to reduce traffic congestion.

2.   It would provide little environmental benefit.

3.   Poor choices were made on selecting the rail routes.

4.   It would downgrade some existing bus service.

5.   It would result in wasteful construction of duplicative facilities.

6.   The start of rail operations would be too slow.

7.   It is mainly a transit system for Seattle.

8.   Serious technical problems remain regarding use of the I-90 floating bridge.

9.   It would have an adverse effect on freight mobility.

10.   So-called “bus rapid transit” may not be effective.

Read all “29 Reasons to Vote No”  at : http://www.eastsiderailnow.org/proposition_1_redo.html

How dare you, TriMet, concoct a new page on your site around basic rules to ride by.  I mean, many of them sound like (gasp!) some of the public transportation riding etiquette tips I’ve posted in the past!  Why… that means: (Wax on) If you follow proper public transit riding etiquette… (Wax off) then you’re most likely following the rules. Let’s go over the rules TriMet posted on this new page of theirs: 1) Valid and Correct Fare Is Required.  Well, we’ve certainly covered enough personal

Yoshiaki Nohara of the Everett Herald reports on comments made by Judy Clibborn regarding the $17.9 billion ST2 tax proposal going o the November 4, 2008 ballot:

The price tag is gigantic, Clibborn said. People are scrambling to deal with the slow economy.

“I’m skeptical whether this is a good time for this,” she said.

In an article on the PNW Local news website, the issue of budget cuts is raised re: police coverage on Sound Transit corridors and unincorporated areas:

“Unincorporated King County will have less law enforcement”

“Citizens in unincorporated areas of northeast King County — including parts of Redmond, Woodinville and Duvall — would be “terribly exposed” to crimes including thefts/burglaries valued under $10,000, bad checks/fraud and regional drug rings because loss of deputies and staff would eliminate most investigations, said (King County Sheriff Sue) Rahr. ”

“We also are Sound Transit and Metro Transit police — we cover 2,000 square miles with that service … and handle homicides, forensics, Homeland Security. … We really are a metropolitan police unit,” Rahr emphasized, countering the notion of a quaint sheriff’s department in a fictional town like Mayberry. “

First of all, it’s completely irresponsible to cut police & security services when the population keeps growing- and what does that mean for cities along a light rail line?

If King County is looking at: “the loss of 21 positions, both commissioned and non-comissioned personnel. King County Executive Ron Sims has called for more reductions in 2009, further slashing up to 70 more jobs in the Sheriff’s Office”, then what happens at light rail stations and on the trains when the inevitable happens- crimes like the typical, numerous assaults in Portland?

Is Sound Transit going to require the cities to pay for security that the light rail line passes through?

Have the cities budgeted for that? Probably not.

Could the cities afford to provide sufficient security to keep their citizens safe? Probably not. Portland isn’t doing a great job of that:

Hire 160 Officers for Light Rail, City Tells TriMet

Crime on the MAX- The Oregonian

North Portland MAX attack renews fear, safety worries

Knife attack on bus raises security concern

71 year-old budgeoned with a bat on Tri-Met

Before the ST2 light rail proposal is voted on in fall 2008, citizens should be assured that what is happening in Portland will NOT HAPPEN here.

Who will take responsibilty for the security budget? Sound Transit? King County Sheriff’s office? We just heard from them that they won’t have the coverage.

Seattle? Bellevue? Redmond?

The Bellevue City Council will seek comments from people about proposed changes to the city’s Comprehensive Plan and other recommendations related to developing a light rail system at a study session Monday at City Hall.

Read former Washington State Secretary of Transportation Doug McDonald’s articles (3) on transit & transportation in the Puget Sound region at the Crosscut site.

Here’s an excerpt:

“Successful organizations build their strategies around meeting customer-driven needs.

The customer-driven mission here is to help move ordinary people where they need to go.

It’s not to lay a few ribbons of expensive rail lines where it seems suitable and convenient to engineering firms, public relations consultants, contractors, and rail buffs.

Sound Transit has to back off the merchandising of this expensive and one-dimensional plan that most people don’t need and won’t use and enter a collaboration to see how all transit can best work for all the people of the region.

The ridership numbers for all the systems are the best place to start the planning.”

We couldn’t have said it better. Read all three articles by McDonald at Crosscut:

Transit Train Wreck: The case against more light rail

Transit Train Wreck: Revealing Bus Route Ridership

Transit Train Wreck: Here’s how to do buses right

The new light rail line under construction in Jerusalem has a unique bridge at the entrance to Jerusalem. It is also known as the Bridge of Strings. Like with all light rail lines, the project has been controversial and charged with being over budget, late and making traffic congestion worse. Heat over troubled bridge:

Nevertheless, the full picture is much less rosy than the PR. While it is true that Jaffa Road will turn into a pedestrian mall once the ...

WOW. According to a Washington Policy Center study: “Attracting a new rider to light rail costs 16 to 47 times as much as attracting a new rider to a traditional bus system“.

Read the Washington Policy Center’s research on light rail and download the study at:

http://www.washingtonpolicy.org/Centers/transportation/policybrief/08_Ennis_LightRail.pdf

The Facts on Light Rail: A Comparative Analysis of Light Rail Systems in Six West Coast Cities

by Michael Ennis
Director, Center for Transportation

As Washington cities consider whether light rail is right for them, this study on the performance of the six existing systems on the West Coast provides factual, real life examples of what taxpayers could expect here. Policymakers and the public should consider whether diverting transportation taxes away from other programs and services is worth the opportunity costs. Based on the data, this analysis concludes that it is not.