520 Tolls, I-90 Tolls (Seattle, Redmond, Kirkland: rental, neighborhood, school)

[HandsUpThumbsDown]

Originally Posted by Jalhop

For examples other than the monorail: The downtown library, much worse and much more expensive than any King County library per square foot. The viaduct tunnel, many times more expensive than cut & cover like the existing tunnel.

The downtown Seattle library is a marvel. It is worse than no other library in the country, let alone King County, IMO. I'm curious what's so bad about it.

[seattlenextyear]

According to my State Senator, I-90, I-405 and parts of I-5 will all be tolled eventually (not that he's voting for that, but that's the general consensus in the state senate). Gotta get revenue somehow.

[mkarch]

Originally Posted by Jalhop

Sounds fair, if our gov't was highly efficient and working solely for the public. But that's not the case. When it's not the case the public should resist per-use rates and fees, especially those used by the masses.

On the bright side, even if that does happen it'll still accomplish the goal of cutting down on congestion. The current system, where the road is really only available to people with a lot of time on their hands is not very efficient.

[Hemlock140]

Originally Posted by mkarch

On the bright side, even if that does happen it'll still accomplish the goal of cutting down on congestion. The current system, where the road is really only available to people with a lot of time on their hands is not very efficient.

This is the big irony. Public transportation is meant to get people out of their cars and reduce pollution, and dependency on fossil fuels. Failure to upgrade road systems while allowing new home developments, and now cutting back on public transit as Metro is talking about, means more people drive so the gridlock worsens, causing more gas to be burned with cars sitting still.

[tifoso]

Originally Posted by Jalhop

It will be a net loss for precisely that reason. Their revenue needs will be the rationale for why the public can't vote directly on toll rates. Because there's no direct vote hence tolls can be easily increased, those revenue needs will be packed with things that don't serve the public and the tolls will increase much faster than the rate of general inflation.

If those "revenue needs" produce projects that could not have been funded without tolling (or by increased toll rates) by definition that can't be a "net loss."

You seem to be objecting more to the fact that there's no way voters can directly weigh in on rates. While it seems intuitive that voters should have a say, there's a very good reason why they don't. Bond underwriters won't touch a proposed bond issue with such a provision. They want as much certainty as possible that bondholders will get paid and giving voters an effective veto over rates flies in the face of that.

[509]

Originally Posted by HandsUpThumbsDown

Interesting writings ... his qualifications aren't listed, as you said.
ETA: I found the author's bio page. Lots of stuff about science fiction and "futurism." ........... Kinda tin-hattish.......... Found nothing about transportation engineering.

That's the reason for my comment..that his page echo's stuff I have read elsewhere.

But his page is a great summary of how self-driving cars will change things.

We hand our lives over to computers everytime we fly a commercial jet. The error rate is computers is MUCH, MUCH lower than humans.

I live in snow country and I remember when anti-lock brakes came out......lots of folks talked about how "that was never going to work". They were never going to trust a computer.

Well, I trust the anti-lock brakes more than I trust myself to steer out of a skid.

A bunch of technological innovations will be added to new cars in the next two or three years. By the time they are driving themselves most people would not even notice.

However, it doesn't make sense at this point to spend billions and billions of tax dollars to increase road capacity with the technological change on the horizon.

[eskercurve]

Originally Posted by 509

A bunch of technological innovations will be added to new cars in the next two or three years. By the time they are driving themselves most people would not even notice.

However, it doesn't make sense at this point to spend billions and billions of tax dollars to increase road capacity with the technological change on the horizon.

I know this is kind of an oversimplification but I see the congestion on the highways as a mass flow rate problem. You have X cars, buses, etc. going through a particular section of road and it is only so wide, and the speed limit is only so fast, ergo there is a hard limit to how many cars can get through.

And you can betcha that the state legislature will be loathe to increase the speed limits to allow more of these self-driving cars through, especially when there's an intermediate period where some self-driving cars are on the road and there's a lot more without. And, trust me, the first time one of these cars crashes into another and it didn't have automated driving, no matter who is at fault most people will say "oh the technology is too early" "there should be limits" etc.

So as great and forward looking as self-driving cars are, from my perspective it will be many, many years before we can say self-driving cars will increase the efficiency of the existing infrastructure. We should still invest billions to make the roads more robust and more "smart" to enable us to detect and pre-emptively address structural problems. There's bridges wired with sensors now that read the strain on the structure and predict when the repetitive loading over time will cause problems, and also detect problems as they arise.

Also, we should still spend billions to allow special lanes for these self-driving cars to operate without fear of some idiot wandering into them or worrying about what I wrote above. There will be about 20 years time before the same laws and same infrastructure can support self-driving cars.

[RunTheDistance476]

As far as the speed limit goes...not really a factor. Why? Because if you have ever driven on the streets here (or anywhere in a city for that matter) I'd be shocked if even 50% of drivers drive at or below the speed limit at any given time during the day. I would say a good percentage go over by 10+ mph if they can.

The only real answer I see is for public transportation to be used. Again I think the east and north extensions of the light link rail and the price of gas in 10 years (estimated completion dates), I think that is going to be a VERY viable option, as I'm sure gas prices in 10 years will probably be well over the 5.00 per gallon mark.

But, if the new rails in 2023 can remove 15-20% of traffic at that time, that is a significant difference. Cuts the cost of 5.00+ gallon of gas, parking, and commute time. Seems to be a win-win-win, for those who will have access.

I don't know the schedule times, but if you can get from Redmond to downtown Seattle in 20-30 minutes (current estimate) at rush hour times in the morning and evening, I think most people would be willing to trade for that, since Im sure if you leave Redmond at 7:00-7:30am now, you're probably looking at least a 45 minute if not an hour commute time. Same with coming from Lynnwood.

PS: WSDOT estimates that 150,000-175,000 total will use all light link rail lines by 2030. Which is like 6-7x what they get now. Ideally, in the future, they could add service to Kirkland - Bothell - Lynnwood and add an additional 50,000 riders or so to that. Regardless if they ever do, talking 150,000 daily commuters off the road is HUGE, even if Seattle's population begins to climb.

I know McGinn wanted to add west side service (West Seattle, Queene Anne, Fremont, etc.) but I guess that fell through. That would also be ideal, too.

[skidamarink]

520 Trolls, I-90 Trolls

It's all a reason not to go to the Eastside.

[flyingsaucermom]

Originally Posted by skidamarink

520 Trolls, I-90 Trolls

It's all a reason not to go to the Eastside.

Unfortunately, it works both ways. It's all a reason not to go to Seattle.