Seattle VS. Portland.... (comparison, quality, difference, expensive)

[caphillsea77]

Originally Posted by Inkpoe

The Eastside construction schedule is already stated both in my post and in the website link. The North Link (basically from UW to Northgate) is dependent on completion of the Capitol Hill-UW link... and as stated on the website: it also states what is left in the "Final Design" stage. North Link is looking to open for service 2020-21. From the link I had up there, if you browse around, this is the information about the North Link: http://projects.soundtransit.org/Doc...olio_11-11.pdf

Again... The West Seattle to Ballard is NOT part of the deal, it's just some plan that's floating around that some people want. It was *never* part of the Light Rail deal. So therefore, no manifestation will ever be state until... the voters ok it. Which has NOT happen and will NOT happen anytime soon until after the current Mayor is gone.

Be a skeptic all you want... but when the Light Rail was accepted by the voters, it was a done deal. Sound Transit/Seattle has done a good job so far and its been efficient, timely. The work, process and connection to the public (with the updates) has been transparent. As mentioned, the only disappointment was Federal Way's deal which will eventually be resolved. Every information one would need about the LR process is in the Sound Transit website.

If you are pleased with the Seattle metro mass transit being partially complete with one line and a 3 mile extension in 3-4 years and yet still not up to par with metro areas half its size until well into the next decade, then OK. But that sure is a long wait. Portland had started light rail construction way back in the 80's. Even Salt Lake City has a more extensive system at this point in time, as does Dallas. And honestly how many people really want to ride light rail and walk around Dallas? But in true Seattle fashion the city can do no wrong according to its citzens and it's perfectly OK to wait 11 or 12 more years to get rails up and running to North Seattle or the Eastside. Whatever. I'd hardly call that ambitious.

I feel many other cities are more up front and honest about discussing their flaws, Seattle is rather passive about it. This voter initiative happend in 2008 and it's taking 15 years to manifest. Even well before 2008 they dragged this issue around inluding the voter approved West Seattle to Ballard monorail. The point is it takes eons for Seattle to make progress happen and at present in 2012 it's further behind in mass transit than most American metropolitan areas including all the other major cities on the West Coast and it will be for at least another decade.

[Inkpoe]

Originally Posted by caphillsea77

If you are pleased with the Seattle metro mass transit being partially complete with one line and a 3 mile extension in 3-4 years and yet still not up to par with metro areas half its size until well into the next decade, then OK. But that sure is a long wait. Portland had started light rail construction way back in the 80's. Even Salt Lake City has a more extensive system at this point in time, as does Dallas. And honestly how many people really want to ride light rail and walk around Dallas? But in true Seattle fashion the city can do no wrong according to its citzens and it's perfectly OK to wait 11 or 12 more years to get rails up and running to North Seattle or the Eastside. Whatever. I'd hardly call that ambitious. I feel many other cities are more up front and honest about discussing their flaws, Seattle is rather passive about it.

I don't understand why you're bringing up SLC, Dallas who have 10+ years head-start on us. Construction started post 2003 (from the airport to DT) and service started 2009... we don't even have 10 years LR operating experience under our belt just yet. How is our line "partially complete"? Its in use right now, operating and doing as well as expected. Everything is a process. You don't even know what's going on with our light rail system, when plans are set up, and what lines will be set up (because the W. Seattle-Ballard is a big oversight on your part) and how its progressing-- and yet Seattle's the one not being up-front and honest? Oh ok And you wonder why some citizens are protective of Seattle? Because too many clueless people keep talkin' out their arse can never admit they're wrong... it's always the city that's wrong.

ETA:

Originally Posted by caphillsea77

I feel many other cities are more up front and honest about discussing their flaws, Seattle is rather passive about it. This voter initiative happend in 2008 and it's taking 15 years to manifest. Even well before 2008 they dragged this issue around inluding the voter approved West Seattle to Ballard monorail. The point is it takes eons for Seattle to make progress happen and at present in 2012 it's further behind in mass transit than most American metropolitan areas including all the other major cities on the West Coast and it will be for at least another decade.

See... show me where the voters approved West Seattle to Ballard Monorail. The only monorail extension that was approved by the voters in the early 2000 was the Queen Anne from Seattle Center, with hopes that it would go to Ballard. There were flaws, and had to be overturned-- the Seattle City Council realized it was too big a project to handle. And the voters agreed in 2005. The recent talk of the W. Seattle-Ballard LR is a Seattle (the city) issue... and just doesn't have enough of the local suport. Especially when you have Sound Transit that is doing a good job. Seattle doesn't control Sound Transit, it's a 3 county regional Transit Authority.

[caphillsea77]

Originally Posted by Inkpoe

I don't understand why you're bringing up SLC, Dallas who have 10+ years head-start on us. Construction started post 2003 (from the airport to DT) and service started 2009... we don't even have 10 years LR operating experience under our belt just yet.

Thus the point I was making, that sun belt cities that arn't as dense as Seattle or as condusive to PT would be 10 years ahead of Seattle solidifies my point of how slow Seattle is at making progress and how Portland is way ahead of the game and has been for some time.

Originally Posted by Inkpoe

How is our line "partially complete"? Its in use right now, operating and doing as well as expected. Everything is a process. .

Only a 17 mile segment of it, thus the system is only partially complete. Portland has 54 miles of track on the ground with more on the way.

Originally Posted by Inkpoe

See... show me where the voters approved West Seattle to Ballard Monorail. The only monorail extension that was approved by the voters in the early 2000 was the Queen Anne from Seattle Center, with hopes that it would go to Ballard. There were flaws, and had to be overturned-- the Seattle City Council realized it was too big a project to handle. And the voters agreed in 2005. The recent talk of the W. Seattle-Ballard LR is a Seattle (the city) issue... and just doesn't have enough of the local suport.

I was living in Seattle at the time and actually cast a voter ballot for the monorail study at the time. Yes it actually was from West Seattle all the way to Ballard. $124 million taxpaying dollars later the project was flawed and cancelled with no construction. This is the kind of nonsense I'm talking about there. (Seattle Monorail Project - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

Originally Posted by Inkpoe

Seattle doesn't control Sound Transit, it's a 3 county regional Transit Authority.

What's that got to do with anything? Most metro areas have more than one county in their mass transit jurisdiction. Tri-Met in Portland serves three counties (Multnomah, Clackamas, and Washington counties).

[Inkpoe]

Originally Posted by caphillsea77

I was living in Seattle at the time and actually cast a voter ballot for the monrail study at the time. Yes it actually was from West Seattle all the way to Ballard. $124 million taxpaying dollars later the project was flawed and cancelled with no construction. This is the kind of nonsense I'm talking about there. (Seattle Monorail Project - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

What;s that got to do with anything? Most metro areas have more than one county in their mass transit jurisdiction. Tri-Met in Portland serves three counties (Multnomah, Clackamas, and Washington counties).

Actually... if you were here in 2005, then you would've known that the voters overturned it. It wouldn't been voter approved, nor be a voter initiative in 2008 because since 2005, Monorail Expansion been DOA. You specifically mentioned:

This voter initiative happend in 2008 and it's taking 15 years to manifest. Even well before 2008 they dragged this issue around inluding the voter approved West Seattle to Ballard monorail.

The Monorail expansion in Seattle is dead. Just not going to happen...

As for Sound Transit, I'm explaining why there isn't much support currently for the W. Seattle-Ballard LR-- it would've fallen under the purview of Seattle City Council which doesn't have the same public confidence that the Sound Transit does.

[DJKirkland]

I totally agree that Portland's network is superior right now - no argument there at all. Dallas / SLC are ahead of us too right now, yes. (I'm very impressed with SLC being the size it is and its ambition) - but you've got to admit that out of those two cities, planning and building a light rail line through Seattle is much more arduous of a task between the hills, lakes, and already densely built environment. MAX has the same obstacles against it for sure.

I'll add that many seem to discount Seattle's transit system, making it sound like some horrible, inaccessible, disjointed affair. Very few of my friends have cars here, and they get around just fine year after year. Most couples I know share one car if they have one - maybe one drives and one takes a bus. Even in the suburbs. The entire transit network here is much more than light rail....think electric trolley busses (which I personally like a lot), extensive ferry system, water taxi, heavy rail.

[orzo]

Originally Posted by caphillsea77

Thus the point I was making, that sun belt cities that arn't as dense as Seattle or as condusive to PT would be 10 years ahead of Seattle solidifies my point of how slow Seattle is at making progress and how Portland is way ahead of the game and has been for some time.



Only a 17 mile segment of it, thus the system is only partially complete. Portland has 54 miles of track on the ground with more on the way.



I was living in Seattle at the time and actually cast a voter ballot for the monorail study at the time. Yes it actually was from West Seattle all the way to Ballard. $124 million taxpaying dollars later the project was flawed and cancelled with no construction. This is the kind of nonsense I'm talking about there. (Seattle Monorail Project - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)



What's that got to do with anything? Most metro areas have more than one county in their mass transit jurisdiction. Tri-Met in Portland serves three counties (Multnomah, Clackamas, and Washington counties).

You can't downplay the subway line between Downtown and Northgate (i.e. U Link and North Link combined) - which hits the three densest neighborhoods in Washington State. This line is going to have very high ridership and will be more like a traditional subway than light rail. I think it's fair to assume it will have higher ridership than any single line in Portland immediately. Also, East Link to Bellevue is another vital regional connections that will have very high ridership and not be slowed down the way MAX is. Sound Transit is taking a long-term approach, but at least they're building the system right.

It's true, though, that a line to Ballard and potentially West Seattle is critical as well. Recently, Sound Transit agreed to dedicate substantial funding to study that corridor. Let's hope it doesn't end up being a streetcar.

By the way, here's a link to a wonky but cool blog about Seattle Transit - they get a lot of views and comments - Seattle Transit Blog

[orzo]

Originally Posted by DJKirkland

I totally agree that Portland's network is superior right now - no argument there at all. Dallas / SLC are ahead of us too right now, yes. (I'm very impressed with SLC being the size it is and its ambition) - but you've got to admit that out of those two cities, planning and building a light rail line through Seattle is much more arduous of a task between the hills, lakes, and already densely built environment. MAX has the same obstacles against it for sure.

I'll add that many seem to discount Seattle's transit system, making it sound like some horrible, inaccessible, disjointed affair. Very few of my friends have cars here, and they get around just fine year after year. Most couples I know share one car if they have one - maybe one drives and one takes a bus. Even in the suburbs. The entire transit network here is much more than light rail....think electric trolley busses (which I personally like a lot), extensive ferry system, water taxi, heavy rail.

Costs in Seattle are astronomically higher than most light rail projects, mostly because of the topography, which is substantially more difficult than Portland's, but also because Sound Transit is building much of it like a heavy-rail system (underground or grade separated) with light rail tracks, while Portland and many other cities go mostly at-grade.

[caphillsea77]

Don't get me wrong, I'm totally onboard with the subway construction and realize that it is a massive undertaking. I couldn't fathom a 4 car light rail train crawling down Broadway, 10th Ave, or Montlake Blvd through Capital Hill down to the U-District. It will be something to have a big city metro system subway whisk passengers from downtown to the U-District in just minutes. I guess I just became a bit cynical in my five years (2000-2005) living there to watch a potential major transit corridor rise and fall with millions wasted on studies and political games and never got the opportunity to ride the rails to Sea-Tac. I remember what it was like driving over the West Seattle bridge at 7:30 AM rush hour traffic and thinking how nice would it be to have a rail link to get into the city. I also kept thinking why didn't this city get the ball rolling ages ago back in the 80's and 90's, especially with all the exponential growth that happend in the 90's when Seattle really came of age. But what can anyone say, it's in the past. It just seems a pity that Seattle has to wait another 10-12 years for something that should have been in place already in a city that will likely see more growth and gridlock before the trains to Northgate or Redmond are in service.

[Inkpoe]

Originally Posted by caphillsea77

I also kept thinking why didn't this city get the ball rolling ages ago back in the 80's and 90's, especially with all the exponential growth that happend in the 90's when Seattle really came of age. But what can anyone say, it's in the past. It just seems a pity that Seattle has to wait another 10-12 years for something that should have been in place already in a city that will likely see more growth and gridlock before the trains to Northgate or Redmond are in service.

Well, they couldn't convince the population in Seattle that this would be the way of life or that it was necessary in the 60s. 70s was just a really bad period for Seattle, which they spent the 80s recovering from. And I'm sure given the Nation's perception on Seattle (that its some backwater town), that the Seattleites still thought then: it was unnecessary. Of course, the 90s was the coming of age... and they did try to do something about it. Uneffectively, as you pointed out. The Sound Transit did have some growing pains, but it's doing the job that needs to be done now, and that's really all anyone can ask for. And its something that Seattleites and the rest of the people in the area can be confident in.

I don't really get why people have to keep bringing up Portland... I have tried their light rail and buses, I still think Seattle's is better. I get that its the darling of public transit because of their light rail... but the fact remains: More Seattleites uses public transit than Portlanders.

[Relegate]

Originally Posted by Inkpoe

Well, they couldn't convince the population in Seattle that this would be the way of life or that it was necessary in the 60s. 70s was just a really bad period for Seattle, which they spent the 80s recovering from. And I'm sure given the Nation's perception on Seattle (that its some backwater town), that the Seattleites still thought then: it was unnecessary. Of course, the 90s was the coming of age... and they did try to do something about it. Uneffectively, as you pointed out. The Sound Transit did have some growing pains, but it's doing the job that needs to be done now, and that's really all anyone can ask for. And its something that Seattleites and the rest of the people in the area can be confident in.

I don't really get why people have to keep bringing up Portland... I have tried their light rail and buses, I still think Seattle's is better. I get that its the darling of public transit because of their light rail... but the fact remains: More Seattleites uses public transit than Portlanders.

I know it's in another country, but Vancouver's SkyTrain really is the best transit system - by far - in the Northwest. Portland MAX and Streetcar is very solid, but it has some major disadvantages. Skytrain has complete grade separation, good (and expanding) coverage, and a very high ridership. It's hard to imagine Portland or Seattle will be able to catch up.