Light-Rail to Somewhere
Good news if you happen to be someone who often travels from downtown Seattle to the airport:
The deal to build a 1.7-mile light-rail link between Seattle-Tacoma International Airport and Tukwila was approved by the Sound Transit board April 13. A light-rail link between downtown Seattle and the airport is expected to be completed by December 2009.I guess having at least some transit options is better than having none at all, but I can think of only two people I know (a married couple) that would be served by a line running from downtown to the airport, and they're not even going to still be in Seattle in 2010. I'd be a lot more excited about the whole thing if:
The deal between Sound Transit and the Port of Seattle, which operates the airport, will allow a light-rail station next to the fourth level of the airport's parking garage, with a pedestrian bridge linking the station and airline ticket counters.
- I thought there was even a slight chance it would be useful to me.
- It wasn't costing the region an arm and a leg (with much of that going to wasteful bureaucracy like paying people $20/hr to board up windows—no joke).
(Puget Sound Business Journal, 04.14.2006)
4 comments:
This is just a generic statement for Seattle Traffic.
I am always against road improvements, because I believe they INCREASE congestion. I'm all for fixing dangerous intersections, potholes, and structural repairs, but I am always against increasing capacity.
Why?
If you build it, they will come.
No matter what, there is a "market" value to sitting in traffic. If there is too much traffic, people will not build new developments. If you reduce their commute hassle, they will build until the hassle returns.
Put another way...you can sit in 2 lanes of traffic now, or 5 lanes of traffic in 5 years. I'll take the 2 lanes, thankyou very much.
Example:
I grew up in Kitsap County, and my grandparents lived in Tacoma. In the early '80s (prior to the 6th ave bypass), when you crossed the Tacoma Narrows, you had to exit at 6th Ave. and make your way to Hwy 16. It took 5 minutes on a bad day, and if you hit every light.
We couldn't have that, so we got the 6th Ave bypass.
Now, the same commute takes 60-90 minutes, and Western Pierce County (Gig Harbor) is a yuppie slum. Less congestion = more homes = more cars = more traffic = more congestion = more taxes. Lather, rinse, repeat...
Undeterred by history, we now have a second bridge going in. Now, you can drive from Port Orchard to Tacoma (so they think). Once South Kitsap becomes a poor man's Gig Harbor, you will have an epic traffic jam. Tacoma still has to accept all the cars (don't ask me how).
If you had a floating bridge from Seattle to Bainbridge, Bainbridge would look like Mercer Island. Put an 8 lane highway all the way from Seattle to Sequim, and you will have a mess that looks like the SF East Bay.
No, voting down traffic improvements is actually the best way to keep traffic sane.
It's counter-intuitive.
umm have you considered the cost savings in not doing long-term parking when going to the airport? If you can take a quick bus downtown to catch the light rail you then have an easy ride to the airport, no begging friends, no long-term parking. It's even better for tourists and business people who are just coming in to Downtown Seattle, this way they don't need a car or have to figure out the bus system.
Business people are never going to take light rail to and from downtown. Most sane tourists will not either.
Light rail is not an "easy ride to the airport." An easy ride is a taxi. A slightly more difficult ride is Shuttle Express. Light rail will take far more time to get to the airport as it travels surface streets through the Rainier Valley.
I have taken light rail from LAX to Hollywood. Never again. Slow (like 1.5 hours), crowded, and no direct drop off at my desination. You think business people traveling on the company dime are going to put up with that inconvience? You think they are going to drag their luggage through the streets from Convention Place to the hotel?
Even taking the tube from Heathrow into downtown London is painfully slow, and it doesn't travel the surface streets.
No, light rail will never be a success in transporting people to the airport. If you don't believe me, try LA's Metro. The ride is very similar to what Link will look like.
I think that more roads/lanes =more use up to a point where gasoline prices make a drive to Sequim like going to Hawaii.
I've noticed an uptick in ridership on east side buses, but the connections make that a pain.
The biggest problem I see is that flow is restricted by inadequate signage and by the existence of pinch points( can you say Factoria/Coal Creek?) caused by poor design. I think the design is caused by political and budgetary pressures and a real lack of regional transportation planning.
My ideas: (1) restrict truck traffic through I5 and 405 during commuting hours, (2) enforce a ban on cell phones while driving, (3) tax households with more than one car,(4) seriously evaluate the regional transportation planning process.
Post a Comment