Buses don't take people off the road; they only transfer them from one type of vehicle on the road to another. Buses may be cheaper and quicker to build, but they wear down quickly and take longer than driving to your destination (everyone passes them!) We made the mistake decades ago not building our rail system. If we don't start now, we'll be the only major city on the West Coast without a useable rail network. Light rail can carry five times as many passengers as buses, travel faster, and don't get stuck in traffic. Most importantly, once a rail network is built, it is permanent and will be there for over a hundred years or more. If you give buses their own lane to bypass traffic, some idiot will decide to let cars buy their way on too at some point in the future – like the HOT lane on 167. Then nothing has been accomplished…except that the privileged and wealthy can rewrite the rules for themselves while you sit in traffic. It is unfortunate when friends, family, and new neighbors travel to (or move to) this beautiful metropolis of four million residents only to discover that it is impractical to get by without a car. That’s good news for gas stations, car dealers, auto mechanics, tire stores, lube-oil shops, and a host of other retailers – but tragic for the environment, trade imbalance, and existing motorists using the congested roads. It is embarrassing to watch cities half Seattle's size build an exceptional rail network while the metropolis of Seattle struggles with gridlock. This upcoming ballot provides the only option to a better rail system now. If we say "no", we'll waste more time and money while gas prices and traffic continue to climb. Meanwhile, other cities with effective light rail will grow and compete for employees and companies. Even if one never plans to use public transportation, the benefit will be shorter commutes and less gas used in gridlock – not to mention less money spent expanding an asphalt infrastructure we have relied on for far too long. A couple of decades ago Seattle voters said "no" for the same reason some argue today – it will take too long and cost too much. If they had said ‘yes’ then, we wouldn’t be in this situation. At some point, someone has to make the decision – do we have that vision? This time we can make the right choice for ourselves, our children, and theirs too. It is time to correct the shortsightedness of the last generation. If the plan doesn't reach your neighborhood yet, it will serve as the backbone for a whole range of options going forward. This is your chance – not only to vote ‘Yes’, but to encourage your friends, neighbors, and co-workers to do so as well. Or you can go on waiting – in traffic and the gas line…
(The author is 15 and has lived in Japan and England for 2 years and has experienced life without a car - relying on subways, buses and trains as a student and with family. It was amazing and quite liberating.)
Tom D. Stephenson - 16 years ago
While there is a desire to solve our transit problems immediately, putting more dollars into a quick expansion of the existing road infrastructure is a poor bandage at best. It will exacerbate gridlock during construction and fail to keep up with continued growth in the meantime. There is not adequate space for more roads and affordable parking anyway...
.
Light rail and/or subway moves substantially more people in less time. It can leverage electricity or alternative energy sources yet to be developed and exploited. Buses are only a quick solution if they run on fossil fuels - electric buses require infrastructure largely not in place. And though it probably won't stop at your curb, rail will serve as the backbone to the overall transit package as it is in many major population centers worldwide.
.
While light rail is the right decision going forward, there are several steps that can be taken immediately to alleviate congestion now. This includes reducing gridlock as personal vehicles travel out of town on weekends, thru-traffic snarling I-5 and I-405 in Seattle and Tacoma weekdays, and the daily commute to and from our urban centers.
.
1. Departing Seattle, Tacoma or Everett on a Friday afternoon for a weekend in any direction is gruelling - featuring extensive ferry lines or rolling slowdowns that stretch for miles. Imagine a roll-on/roll-off car train service that could zip you to an intermediate destination such as Portland, Ellensburg, or Vancouver, BC. And for those heading across the Sound, to the San Juan Islands, or even Canada, a barge service for overflow vehicles at peak times while passengers enjoy the comfort of the ferry in transit - far better than a 6-hour wait in an asphalt parking lot. Roll-on/Roll-off service could be expanded along I-90 between Northbend and Cle Elum during winter months when pass conditions are dire. It could go as far as Spokane too during peak weekends, providing safe and affordable options and helping to integrate this population center.
.
2. Long-haul vehicles and those in the North- or South-end who must transit through Seattle to reach their destination reluctantly particpate in the frantic crush of vehicles converging on downtown Seattle. Far better would be a lane dedicated to bypassing the many, closely-spaced exits between Lynnwood and Southcenter. Congestion pricing might help to discourage passage of long-haul trucks during peak times, but might not address the many personal vehicles.
.
3. To address the remaining congestion during peak times in all urban centers, not just Seattle, incentives to utilize vanpools should be expanded immediatley. This includes employer subsidies or offsets, property tax incentives, and preferential parking. Expanded bus service is also critical to allow earlier and later travel during weekdays.
.
To complete the infrastructure for a viable transit system, private-sector services such as luggage delivery, large-purchase delivery, and incidental rideshare need to be affordable and convenient. Examples of these can be found in many metropolitan areas. When combined with a light rail backbone and expanded bus/rideshare network, many households find they can get by with fewer vehicles - and more fuel efficient ones at that! Shared-use vehicles or rentals can address special situations as they arise - still at substantial savings over ongoing vehicle payments, repairs, maintainence, insurance, and licensing.
.
It is time to do the right thing. But we don't have to limit ourselves to the option presented. The Northwest could easily leapfrog other West Coast communities and lead by example - despite a late start.
Bob H - 16 years ago
In 1995, Phase 1 of Sound Transit was approved with the project to be complete by 2006. It is now 3 times what the initial cost projection was and still not complete and the scope has been significantly downsized. In addition, the tax for it can go on forever even though voters were told it would end in 10 years. How can we believe anything Sound Transit says. For that reason, I have to vote against them as they have never lived up to their word.
MJ - 16 years ago
I used to commute from Tacoma to Seattle by bus - I had good connections and the bus was a nice commute until I could no longer get a seat and stood up 80% of the time. And the bus became far slower than me driving alone. Now I will not get out of my car until transportation in the area gets innovative - like a high speed train or monorail up the I-5 corridor. Light rail is way too slow and there is no way that I will vote for such a wimpy alleged solution.
Eagle Redstone - 16 years ago
Look at the coverage of proposed transit rail lines for the Puget Sound area and then look at a rail map of London, Hong Kong, Paris, Tokyo or any major transit system in Europe. I have visited and worked in these cities and their systems work because there are enough routes and stations to enable commuters to conveniently ride to within walking distance of most anywhere you want to go.
This is not the case for any system yet proposed by Sound Transit. If you scale their proposed plans which will really only support commuters to downtown Seattle (who already have the most commuting options) to match the density of coverage in those other cities, the cost would be astronomical.
We need a transit solution that will serve more living and business centers much cheaper and sooner! The way to do both is to leverage our existing infrastructure. We should exploit all existing rail corridors and employ more bus only lanes for freeways and surface streets before we approve building any more costly light rail structures.
Improved bus service with highway/street infrastructure enhancements would be a much more flexible and cost effective solution for the challenging topography of our region.
Why do elected leaders in Western Washington always seem to favor the most expensive construction cost heavy solutions to every problem? You decide?
Teri - 16 years ago
Expansion of public transportation is desperately needed in our community. I will vote 'yes' for this initiative.
Brian Sanders - 16 years ago
I don't care what it costs, it is ridiculous that this large region doesn't have a viable rail system. Hong Kong and SF are similar geography scenarios and both serve as wonderful models.
Ryan - 16 years ago
What a buch of nut jobs. A car free future? Sorry I am not going to rely on Government controlled transportation.
ck ramos - 16 years ago
I wish I had European friends, too, that I had to impress and say, "I'm just like you..." If I had to pay what they pay for their over-taxed gas I might do what they do.
Voting on something/anything that I won't be using, is really a bad idea. I would still have to use gas to drive to they rail station.
This area doesn't anymore prosperity and it doesn't need a 0.5% increased padded on to an already high 8.9% sales tax. I'm sure it's higher in other areas and we have it good...
Global warming is a dead issue. NPR, nytimes, boston globe posted articles stating that it's taking a break.
"Democratic Leaders" is an oxymoron. Whose leading the people or the leaders. We're a Republic, which is not to be confused with the political party.
I don't live on comment boards, and I won't be reading any replies. If you replied I guess I wrote something worth something and thank you.
Joe Voter - 16 years ago
Great idea. But you know what - I'm pretty tired of sales tax increases. I drive very little as it is, and I'll end up paying for this whether I use it or not. I vote no.
Leif Espelund - 16 years ago
This is our best option to finally start what should have been started over 40 years ago. Let's pass this and get moving towards a car-free future. Tinkerbell, luckily we don't have to totally rely on our democratic leaders to do transit right. We the citizens have setup Sound Transit, a solid agency with good oversight, talented people and an excellent track record, to take the lead on long-term transportation solutions. We just have to make sure our democratic leaders support ST, which is why we have to replace Sims next chance we get.
I live in Seattle and take transit to get around. We've needed this for forty years - this kind of project was first on the ballot in 1968. Voters rejected it then.
It would be neither wise nor affordable to expand our highways further. We need to expand our mass transit system - and this plan does so in a balanced way, with bus service immediately and more rail for the long term.
Tinkerbell Hilton - 16 years ago
I agree with what Nessim says above. And my European friends do not drive at all because they do not need to! And I loathe driving more and more each day. I do not think that adding bus after bus after bus is a viable long term solution. Rather, adding trains and light rail is an excellent long term solution. I am just not convinced that Ron Sims and the current Democrat leadership in WA State are the people that can and will lead WA in the right direction transportationwise. There has been one boon doggle after another and the people have to be getting tired of this.
Vincent - 16 years ago
People need more transit options. Putting more buses into traffic sounds like a great idea, NOT. Adding more buses now is only a temporary fix. All of us have notice buses hardly arrives at the scheduled time. Gas price is never going back to where it used to be. For long term fix, light-rail is what the Puget Sound need. You never have to guess what time the train will arrive when the rail is use for only rail services. If you add to the Port of Seattle purchase on the eastside than you have both sides of Lake Washington covered. If those who are thinking of voting NO, go down to Portland and San Francisco check out their rail system. If you have ever travelled to Tokyo, trains and subways will take you anywhere. Anyone that is not for light-rail, is for global warming.
OK, so my house is in Maltby, and I'm currently in London, with the highest transit fares in the world. Still, this project is vital to the long term prosperity of the Puget Sound as continued growth is inevitable, but the space to add freeway lanes is highly limited. It is the best way to preserve our wonderful way of life.
Buses don't take people off the road; they only transfer them from one type of vehicle on the road to another. Buses may be cheaper and quicker to build, but they wear down quickly and take longer than driving to your destination (everyone passes them!) We made the mistake decades ago not building our rail system. If we don't start now, we'll be the only major city on the West Coast without a useable rail network. Light rail can carry five times as many passengers as buses, travel faster, and don't get stuck in traffic. Most importantly, once a rail network is built, it is permanent and will be there for over a hundred years or more. If you give buses their own lane to bypass traffic, some idiot will decide to let cars buy their way on too at some point in the future – like the HOT lane on 167. Then nothing has been accomplished…except that the privileged and wealthy can rewrite the rules for themselves while you sit in traffic. It is unfortunate when friends, family, and new neighbors travel to (or move to) this beautiful metropolis of four million residents only to discover that it is impractical to get by without a car. That’s good news for gas stations, car dealers, auto mechanics, tire stores, lube-oil shops, and a host of other retailers – but tragic for the environment, trade imbalance, and existing motorists using the congested roads. It is embarrassing to watch cities half Seattle's size build an exceptional rail network while the metropolis of Seattle struggles with gridlock. This upcoming ballot provides the only option to a better rail system now. If we say "no", we'll waste more time and money while gas prices and traffic continue to climb. Meanwhile, other cities with effective light rail will grow and compete for employees and companies. Even if one never plans to use public transportation, the benefit will be shorter commutes and less gas used in gridlock – not to mention less money spent expanding an asphalt infrastructure we have relied on for far too long. A couple of decades ago Seattle voters said "no" for the same reason some argue today – it will take too long and cost too much. If they had said ‘yes’ then, we wouldn’t be in this situation. At some point, someone has to make the decision – do we have that vision? This time we can make the right choice for ourselves, our children, and theirs too. It is time to correct the shortsightedness of the last generation. If the plan doesn't reach your neighborhood yet, it will serve as the backbone for a whole range of options going forward. This is your chance – not only to vote ‘Yes’, but to encourage your friends, neighbors, and co-workers to do so as well. Or you can go on waiting – in traffic and the gas line…
(The author is 15 and has lived in Japan and England for 2 years and has experienced life without a car - relying on subways, buses and trains as a student and with family. It was amazing and quite liberating.)
While there is a desire to solve our transit problems immediately, putting more dollars into a quick expansion of the existing road infrastructure is a poor bandage at best. It will exacerbate gridlock during construction and fail to keep up with continued growth in the meantime. There is not adequate space for more roads and affordable parking anyway...
.
Light rail and/or subway moves substantially more people in less time. It can leverage electricity or alternative energy sources yet to be developed and exploited. Buses are only a quick solution if they run on fossil fuels - electric buses require infrastructure largely not in place. And though it probably won't stop at your curb, rail will serve as the backbone to the overall transit package as it is in many major population centers worldwide.
.
While light rail is the right decision going forward, there are several steps that can be taken immediately to alleviate congestion now. This includes reducing gridlock as personal vehicles travel out of town on weekends, thru-traffic snarling I-5 and I-405 in Seattle and Tacoma weekdays, and the daily commute to and from our urban centers.
.
1. Departing Seattle, Tacoma or Everett on a Friday afternoon for a weekend in any direction is gruelling - featuring extensive ferry lines or rolling slowdowns that stretch for miles. Imagine a roll-on/roll-off car train service that could zip you to an intermediate destination such as Portland, Ellensburg, or Vancouver, BC. And for those heading across the Sound, to the San Juan Islands, or even Canada, a barge service for overflow vehicles at peak times while passengers enjoy the comfort of the ferry in transit - far better than a 6-hour wait in an asphalt parking lot. Roll-on/Roll-off service could be expanded along I-90 between Northbend and Cle Elum during winter months when pass conditions are dire. It could go as far as Spokane too during peak weekends, providing safe and affordable options and helping to integrate this population center.
.
2. Long-haul vehicles and those in the North- or South-end who must transit through Seattle to reach their destination reluctantly particpate in the frantic crush of vehicles converging on downtown Seattle. Far better would be a lane dedicated to bypassing the many, closely-spaced exits between Lynnwood and Southcenter. Congestion pricing might help to discourage passage of long-haul trucks during peak times, but might not address the many personal vehicles.
.
3. To address the remaining congestion during peak times in all urban centers, not just Seattle, incentives to utilize vanpools should be expanded immediatley. This includes employer subsidies or offsets, property tax incentives, and preferential parking. Expanded bus service is also critical to allow earlier and later travel during weekdays.
.
To complete the infrastructure for a viable transit system, private-sector services such as luggage delivery, large-purchase delivery, and incidental rideshare need to be affordable and convenient. Examples of these can be found in many metropolitan areas. When combined with a light rail backbone and expanded bus/rideshare network, many households find they can get by with fewer vehicles - and more fuel efficient ones at that! Shared-use vehicles or rentals can address special situations as they arise - still at substantial savings over ongoing vehicle payments, repairs, maintainence, insurance, and licensing.
.
It is time to do the right thing. But we don't have to limit ourselves to the option presented. The Northwest could easily leapfrog other West Coast communities and lead by example - despite a late start.
In 1995, Phase 1 of Sound Transit was approved with the project to be complete by 2006. It is now 3 times what the initial cost projection was and still not complete and the scope has been significantly downsized. In addition, the tax for it can go on forever even though voters were told it would end in 10 years. How can we believe anything Sound Transit says. For that reason, I have to vote against them as they have never lived up to their word.
I used to commute from Tacoma to Seattle by bus - I had good connections and the bus was a nice commute until I could no longer get a seat and stood up 80% of the time. And the bus became far slower than me driving alone. Now I will not get out of my car until transportation in the area gets innovative - like a high speed train or monorail up the I-5 corridor. Light rail is way too slow and there is no way that I will vote for such a wimpy alleged solution.
Look at the coverage of proposed transit rail lines for the Puget Sound area and then look at a rail map of London, Hong Kong, Paris, Tokyo or any major transit system in Europe. I have visited and worked in these cities and their systems work because there are enough routes and stations to enable commuters to conveniently ride to within walking distance of most anywhere you want to go.
This is not the case for any system yet proposed by Sound Transit. If you scale their proposed plans which will really only support commuters to downtown Seattle (who already have the most commuting options) to match the density of coverage in those other cities, the cost would be astronomical.
We need a transit solution that will serve more living and business centers much cheaper and sooner! The way to do both is to leverage our existing infrastructure. We should exploit all existing rail corridors and employ more bus only lanes for freeways and surface streets before we approve building any more costly light rail structures.
Improved bus service with highway/street infrastructure enhancements would be a much more flexible and cost effective solution for the challenging topography of our region.
Why do elected leaders in Western Washington always seem to favor the most expensive construction cost heavy solutions to every problem? You decide?
Expansion of public transportation is desperately needed in our community. I will vote 'yes' for this initiative.
I don't care what it costs, it is ridiculous that this large region doesn't have a viable rail system. Hong Kong and SF are similar geography scenarios and both serve as wonderful models.
What a buch of nut jobs. A car free future? Sorry I am not going to rely on Government controlled transportation.
I wish I had European friends, too, that I had to impress and say, "I'm just like you..." If I had to pay what they pay for their over-taxed gas I might do what they do.
Voting on something/anything that I won't be using, is really a bad idea. I would still have to use gas to drive to they rail station.
This area doesn't anymore prosperity and it doesn't need a 0.5% increased padded on to an already high 8.9% sales tax. I'm sure it's higher in other areas and we have it good...
Global warming is a dead issue. NPR, nytimes, boston globe posted articles stating that it's taking a break.
"Democratic Leaders" is an oxymoron. Whose leading the people or the leaders. We're a Republic, which is not to be confused with the political party.
I don't live on comment boards, and I won't be reading any replies. If you replied I guess I wrote something worth something and thank you.
Great idea. But you know what - I'm pretty tired of sales tax increases. I drive very little as it is, and I'll end up paying for this whether I use it or not. I vote no.
This is our best option to finally start what should have been started over 40 years ago. Let's pass this and get moving towards a car-free future. Tinkerbell, luckily we don't have to totally rely on our democratic leaders to do transit right. We the citizens have setup Sound Transit, a solid agency with good oversight, talented people and an excellent track record, to take the lead on long-term transportation solutions. We just have to make sure our democratic leaders support ST, which is why we have to replace Sims next chance we get.
I live in Seattle and take transit to get around. We've needed this for forty years - this kind of project was first on the ballot in 1968. Voters rejected it then.
It would be neither wise nor affordable to expand our highways further. We need to expand our mass transit system - and this plan does so in a balanced way, with bus service immediately and more rail for the long term.
I agree with what Nessim says above. And my European friends do not drive at all because they do not need to! And I loathe driving more and more each day. I do not think that adding bus after bus after bus is a viable long term solution. Rather, adding trains and light rail is an excellent long term solution. I am just not convinced that Ron Sims and the current Democrat leadership in WA State are the people that can and will lead WA in the right direction transportationwise. There has been one boon doggle after another and the people have to be getting tired of this.
People need more transit options. Putting more buses into traffic sounds like a great idea, NOT. Adding more buses now is only a temporary fix. All of us have notice buses hardly arrives at the scheduled time. Gas price is never going back to where it used to be. For long term fix, light-rail is what the Puget Sound need. You never have to guess what time the train will arrive when the rail is use for only rail services. If you add to the Port of Seattle purchase on the eastside than you have both sides of Lake Washington covered. If those who are thinking of voting NO, go down to Portland and San Francisco check out their rail system. If you have ever travelled to Tokyo, trains and subways will take you anywhere. Anyone that is not for light-rail, is for global warming.
OK, so my house is in Maltby, and I'm currently in London, with the highest transit fares in the world. Still, this project is vital to the long term prosperity of the Puget Sound as continued growth is inevitable, but the space to add freeway lanes is highly limited. It is the best way to preserve our wonderful way of life.