Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Coming from the south sound, the light rail can be a very useful tool to get into the city especially during Seahawk games and other events going on. But we are light years behind where the city should be. It seems like it takes 10 years for every mile of track to be built. By the time we are done building light rail through the area there will be too many people in the city for the infrastructure to handle. Why can't local government officials make this a priority rather thenworking to astronomical increase minimum wage or any other issues that aren't very pressing to the city and area around it?
In order to bring a new service (i.e., build up or expand upon public transit), you will need a new source of income to feed that growth. That almost certainly means some kind of new tax ...
... And that is why politicians are running away from this like it's a nuclear bomb. The postscript on the recent proposition for public transit is definitely not helping things. Seattle will almost certainly pay for public transit within their borders; the question is whether the rest of King County and Pierce County will get on board. So far, that answer has not just been a "no", but HELL NO.
That right there is the issue. People don't want to invest in public transit because (a) they are paying to invest in something they may not themselves live to benefit from, and (b) the overall region has had a loooooooooong history (30+ years and counting) of watching boom-and-bust cycles but not necessarily benefiting from them.
Right now, Snohomish County's unemployment rate is 1.5 percentage points higher than King County's. Pierce County's unemployment rate is over 7% (compared to King County's 5% rate, and Seattle's 4% rate). Not everyone is benefiting from growth equally, and that is fueling a lot of resentment that translates in the ballot box.
In order to grow in a healthy and productive manner, you have to address those issues.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,551 posts, read 81,085,957 times
Reputation: 57744
They can't even come up with the money to maintain the current level of King County Metro bus service, with major cuts coming in September/ There is simply no funding available for additional transit projects. It seems that the voters generally want more/better transit but do not trust the government to spend the money wisely, and therefore turn down tax increases for it. People I have spoken to about the no vote have all said that they should already have enough money, but feel like the union employees are overpaid and that management is top-heavy.
The biggest problem is that any tax that could be used to pay for transit must go to the ballot, and not enough people in the region use transit for anyone to think that dumping money into the system is worthwhile. Outside a few core neighborhoods in Seattle, it's generally assumed that you're going to be driving everywhere. No matter what we like to spew about Seattle being a walkable and bike-friendly city, the fact remains that anyone who can afford it will be driving. Seattle is very typical of West Coast cities that grew up around the car and are now struggling to fit transit into the equation.
Use this forum as an example. When someone is moving here and asks "How long is the commute to downtown," the answers are given in driving times. In plenty of other cities in the US, you'd be considered crazy for wanting to drive to work downtown when transit is so much cheaper and less stressful. But since we've haphazardly cobbled together a half-functional transit system over the years, many people see transit commutes as inconvenient and unreliable.
There are a few other factors that have institutionalized Seattle's car dependence. The city has precious little night and weekend transit, and the routes as a whole are configured for getting people downtown and not much of anywhere else. The city is also very spread out - the two nightlife districts in Capitol Hill and Ballard are separated by about 6 miles, a trip that can easily take 90 minutes on transit. While in other cities, people might be more open to living car-free, in Seattle this is mostly limited to low-income people or the young middle class living in places like Belltown or Capitol Hill.
They can't even come up with the money to maintain the current level of King County Metro bus service, with major cuts coming in September/ There is simply no funding available for additional transit projects. It seems that the voters generally want more/better transit but do not trust the government to spend the money wisely, and therefore turn down tax increases for it. People I have spoken to about the no vote have all said that they should already have enough money, but feel like the union employees are overpaid and that management is top-heavy.
The funniest part about the "union employees are overpaid" argument is that people didn't understand that something like 85% of bus drivers are strictly part-time. Most of them never work over 20 hours. There are a handful that get the lion's share of hours, and the rest of the fleet works part-time to fill in the gaps. Even with overtime, your average bus driver makes just shy of $30k (and most of them work another job on the side).
Meanwhile, the administration makes WAY more money. No one ever talks about cutting boss' salaries, though ...
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,551 posts, read 81,085,957 times
Reputation: 57744
Quote:
Originally Posted by amaiunmei
The funniest part about the "union employees are overpaid" argument is that people didn't understand that something like 85% of bus drivers are strictly part-time. Most of them never work over 20 hours. There are a handful that get the lion's share of hours, and the rest of the fleet works part-time to fill in the gaps. Even with overtime, your average bus driver makes just shy of $30k (and most of them work another job on the side).
Meanwhile, the administration makes WAY more money. No one ever talks about cutting boss' salaries, though ...
In the past since we have been here, Metro has had tax increases pass that were meant for expansion but fell far short of what was promised. Most of the public perception is based on the "NO" campaign information: The Metro driver average pay has gone up over double the rate of inflation over the last 10 years, and that some drivers are making over $75k and even over $100k. Probably accurate but not in context, for example the $100,000 drivers could be voluntarily working a lot of overtime to make up for others calling in sick, but campaigners don't give all the details of their "facts." I agree though, there is plenty of room for cuts at the top and much better management practices that would go a long way to restoring public confidence. Currently, ridership is actually way up, just as Metro is about to make major cuts in routes.
In the past since we have been here, Metro has had tax increases pass that were meant for expansion but fell far short of what was promised. Most of the public perception is based on the "NO" campaign information: The Metro driver average pay has gone up over double the rate of inflation over the last 10 years, and that some drivers are making over $75k and even over $100k. Probably accurate but not in context, for example the $100,000 drivers could be voluntarily working a lot of overtime to make up for others calling in sick, but campaigners don't give all the details of their "facts." I agree though, there is plenty of room for cuts at the top and much better management practices that would go a long way to restoring public confidence. Currently, ridership is actually way up, just as Metro is about to make major cuts in routes.
The "Metro driver average pay has gone up double the rate of inflation" is also misleading, as they may be calculating the cost of medical benefits. The union contracts usually call for cost of living increases that are 90% of the rate of inflation. It takes six years to get to the top of the wage scale, and there are a few spots that can be picked where there is overtime opportunity, like filling in for drivers calling in sick, etc. The drivers who make 100k not only put in a lot of overtime, they are also committed to being on the property for up to 13 hours per day, in case they are needed.
Light rail is either under construction or in final planning stages for lines from Lynnwood to Federal Way and to Bellevue. We have heavy rail connecting Tacoma and Everett to Seattle. The First Hill streetcar will be running by Christmas, and more streetcar routes are in the planning stages.
I've long thought that we should have protected the rights-of-way along abandoned rail lines to use for light rail or heavy rail mass transit. We'd have a rail line that connects Ballard, the UW (and the Link station there), Lake Forest Park, Kenmore and all the way to Redmond along the Burke-Gilman route. We'd have a line that connects Renton to Woodinville and Everett along the recently-abandoned BN route. We'd have a line that could connect Seattle to Issaquah and North Bend along the Mountains to Sound trail. Light Rail could travel where it traveled long ago from Puyallup to Seattle along the Interurban Trail instead of having to share with BNSF. And we could have light rail that parallels Aurora all the way from Green Lake to Everett on the northern Interurban Trail.
The bike paths are great, but they will never relieve as much traffic as light rail could. But there is zero political will to convert the trails back to their original use, and the voters aren't interested in paying for it.
Outside a few core neighborhoods in Seattle, it's generally assumed that you're going to be driving everywhere. No matter what we like to spew about Seattle being a walkable and bike-friendly city, the fact remains that anyone who can afford it will be driving. Seattle is very typical of West Coast cities that grew up around the car and are now struggling to fit transit into the equation.
I just sold my car a month ago to get more walking and save on money. I get bored very easily on a treadmill. from where i live, my new travel times are as follows, to friends places and other errands.
my place to tukwila by car- 10 mins, with bus- 2 hours. light rail- 50mins
my place to southcenter mall by car- 15 mins, by bus- 2 hours.
my place to covington by car- 30 mins, by bus 3.5 hours
my place to shoreline by car- 15 mins, by bus 2.5 hours
my place to central district by car- 10 mins, by bus-1.5 hours
now, these are all times with walking to bus station, waiting, bus comes, then transfer, wait, get on bus, and transfer again, and walk to point B. the money i saved and exercise is great, and i do enjoy the sun, but time is money on the other hand and i would probably get a car once winter comes. and oh yeah, once its a sunday the trip time gets even worse. its much easier to just hop onto a car and drive straight to a driveway in point B, it all depends on how much a person values time and money. every hour i loose on travel can be used for something else.
I just sold my car a month ago to get more walking and save on money. I get bored very easily on a treadmill. from where i live, my new travel times are as follows, to friends places and other errands.
my place to tukwila by car- 10 mins, with bus- 2 hours. light rail- 50mins
my place to southcenter mall by car- 15 mins, by bus- 2 hours.
my place to covington by car- 30 mins, by bus 3.5 hours
my place to shoreline by car- 15 mins, by bus 2.5 hours
my place to central district by car- 10 mins, by bus-1.5 hours
now, these are all times with walking to bus station, waiting, bus comes, then transfer, wait, get on bus, and transfer again, and walk to point B. the money i saved and exercise is great, and i do enjoy the sun, but time is money on the other hand and i would probably get a car once winter comes. and oh yeah, once its a sunday the trip time gets even worse. its much easier to just hop onto a car and drive straight to a driveway in point B, it all depends on how much a person values time and money. every hour i loose on travel can be used for something else.
This is my point exactly. We're not going to convince anyone to give up cars until these ridiculous time differences get smaller. In fairness, suburban transit royally sucks across the US, so it's not surprising to see these kinds of travel times for suburbs. In fact, Seattle actually has very good transit options in suburbs, at least for getting to downtown Seattle, downtown Bellevue, and UW.
Where Seattle really falls short is inner city transit, which is odd considering that's where ridership is highest.
For anyone who cares about this stuff, I highly recommend Seattle Transit Blog, where they like to hash out Seattle transit issues ad nauseam.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
