SEATTLE Rail & Bus

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by electricron

Almost all light rail lines in the USA, trams for the rest of the civilized world, run some of their light rail system at grade. Even what is often called light rail metros in the USA, Honolulu being one example that has one at grade train station.

Yes but none of them spent the money to have the vast majority of their LRT system be grade separated and capable of metro service while leaving out a small portion that has grade crossings. I actually measured the parts of line 1 that are grade separated vs not and the grade separated part is about 85%. The closest would be LA green line C but it's fully grade separated and therefore a metro line that just happens to use LRV rolling stock.

And based on your remark about Honolulu having an at-grade station, I'm not actually sure you understand what being grade separated means. It doesn't mean that none of the system runs at surface level. It means that the line is separated from other traffic (whether it be rail, pedestrian, or road) by either having the transit line run above or below the conflicting traffic or for that other traffic to run above or below the transit line. It's like how a controlled access expressway is grade separated. It doesn't have any intersections with stop signs, traffic lights, driveways, crosswalks, etc. as there are always overpasses or underpasses involved for anyone wanting to cross it. So a line can be entirely at grade and be fully grade-separated if there are overpasses or underpasses for anything that it crosses.

The reason separating it from other traffic is important is that it allows a higher top speed, the potential for automation, prevents the transit line from blocking intersections and affecting traffic flow, doesn't require the train to wait at any intersections, eliminates the risk of collisions with those other modes. And the reason for making a line elevated or underground for longer stretches is that it isn't always practical to have underpasses and overpasses in an urban setting due to space requirements or that so many over/under passes would be required that the cost wouldn't be much cheaper than having it elevated or underground for the whole segment while being less disruptive.

[llamaorama]

I would think in Seattle's case the biggest fault with the tram-like street median alignment along MLK is that it drastically slows down a line which when fully complete is going to be very long.

It's not even that it's at-grade, I mean the DART Blue line runs through Garland parallel to an active freight line with flashing lights and arms and still goes 65 mph. It's really the trolley track design where the rails are in pavement around Othello station and there's businesses and houses facing the street and pedestrians who probably jaywalk across the tracks all the time that really ruins it, if trains went any faster than 30-35 mph you'd end up with crashes and killing people.

But doesn't seem realistic to spend billions of dollars to rebuild or reroute an existing line when there's expansions to whole new areas that needs to be funded instead.

Maybe there would be a way to incrementally speed it up. South of Ranier Beach there's about a mile of track in the middle of MLK but there's nothing along the road except worn out metal sheds with tire shops and stuff in them. Maybe concrete barriers could go up blocking crossing the tracks at a few places and instead the handful of vehicles present would make a U-turn instead.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by llamaorama

I would think in Seattle's case the biggest fault with the tram-like street median alignment along MLK is that it drastically slows down a line which when fully complete is going to be very long.

It's not even that it's at-grade, I mean the DART Blue line runs through Garland parallel to an active freight line with flashing lights and arms and still goes 65 mph. It's really the trolley track design where the rails are in pavement around Othello station and there's businesses and houses facing the street and pedestrians who probably jaywalk across the tracks all the time that really ruins it, if trains went any faster than 30-35 mph you'd end up with crashes and killing people.

Yes it's true that you can get most or all of the speed advantage of full grade separation by using railroad style crossing gates in places where they're feasible to implement. But I would point out that part of the reason that works in Dallas is that it has much lower frequency than Seattle. Each line in DART only runs every 15 min at peak whereas in Seattle, line 1 runs as much as every 6 minutes. That's 4 trains per hours vs 10. And not surprisingly, Seattle LRT has a higher ridership than the much larger, multi-line DART system. And I'd consider that an even bigger advantage to full grade separation - the ability to supercharge the service frequency and capacity. A metro line can basically laugh at that 10tph with their ability to more than triple that.

[Doady]

Yes, Seattle built LRT where the people are, Dallas did not. That's the most important thing, not speed, and it is reflected in Seattle's higher LRT ridership.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by Doady

Yes, Seattle built LRT where the people are, Dallas did not. That's the most important thing, not speed, and it is reflected in Seattle's higher LRT ridership.

True DART did build trains on mostly ex-railroad corridors that once linked freight trains across the country. Corridors immediately surrounded by warehouses, industries, and ranch land. Not many people like living near the ambient noises coming from trains. So initially, there were not many poeple living near the train stations.

Never-the-less, if you watch youtube videos from 1996-2006 era and compare them to videos from today, within the last year or so, you will see a significant difference with TODs springing up everywhere near the DART train stations. TODs are continuing to be built. The people are moving to the train stations where they were built a decade or more ago.

Check out the Orange line through Irving through the Las Colinas neighborhood specifically. From nothing to a small city of TODs.

That old saying; build it and they will come, is true.

P.S. That Las Colinas area is within a median of a city arterial street, much like the MLK in Seattle. And I have seen a few TODs spring up around MLK as well on Sound Transit videos. Give it time.

[mhays]

The older 1 Line stations to the south have some of the LEAST housing construction of all the new openings. Those areas have historically been lower income and lacked large sites. That said, a number of buildings are going up, particularly at Othello.

The four new stations from Shoreline to Lynnwood have 10,000 units recently opened, planned, or underway per the Seattle Times a few weeks ago. That was a 1/2-mile radius, so not necessarily TOD by most definitions.

East Link has similar numbers east of Downtown Bellevue.

For East Link's 2025 additions, Judkins Park in Seattle, Mercer Island, Marymoor Park, and Downtown Redmond all have a lot of housing construction recent/underway/planned.

The previous northern extension to the U District, Roosevelt, and Northgate would collectively have a similar number as well.

Downtown and Downtown Bellevue could tie tens of thousands of units to Link, but they could be about walkable proximity to jobs too.

[llamaorama]

I didn't mean to start a comparison between DART and Sound Transit Link, I just cited it as an example where an at-grade alignment could meet whatever technical and regulatory requirements would exist to support trains running at speeds comparable to a car on an uncongested freeway.

But now that we are on the subject, I think you guys have a misinformed opinion of DART and do not realize how many of the stations do have quite a bit of density surrounding them or the amount of new TOD that has been built or is planned. In contrast, its quite clear looking in Google Maps that many of the new Link stations are currently surrounded by strip malls and stroads.

I suspect the real difference between Seattle and Dallas light rail ridership is that Seattle has more transit usage in general which is probably due to being a high cost of living vs low cost of living area.

My personal experience with Seattle transit is that more "normal" people use it than use transit in Dallas and I bet this is because of the cost of living. I've ridden the bus there a few times and except for the homeless people the people on the bus were a diverse mix, white, black, asian, etc wearing clothes that you would wear in an office. One time going to Seattle for work I had to use a company car to give a guy on our team a ride from his apartment in Lynnwood because he didn't have a car or a driver's license. Normally he said he rode the bus to downtown. We got to quietly talking about salary differences between the DFW team and the Seattle team and the Seattle people make more than the DFW people but on the DFW side you have people buying houses and in Seattle they are riding the bus.

In contrast I've ridden DART light rail a few times, mostly boarding and departing at stations on the Red Line where it passes through areas that are sort of affluent and the stations have a lot of nice apartments and condos and offices near them, and the train is mostly empty except for homeless people. The people who live in those areas that have good rail service are all driving their cars.

[Nouvellecosse]

I personally wasn't criticizing the DART system. There are plenty of LRT systems that make extensive use of railroad crossing gates to achieve speed including Calgary, one of NA's busiest and most successful. It was Doady who said that it has poor station locations and I'm not familiar enough with it to confirm nor deny. I was just pointing out that speed is not the only major benefit of grade separation since another is the potential for greater frequency.

[mhays]

There are so many factors in addition to housing prices. Some big ones:

In Washington, all major employers have to encourage alternative commutes due to the Commute Trip Reduction Act. Offices typically have low parking ratios, and frequently employees get benefits to not use parking. Most office workers and college workers (along with college students) get free transit passes.

Seattle-area apartments typically come with fewer parking spaces than units, both within the city limits and in suburbs with good transit.

Transit is far better. Link runs far more often than many other systems. Our buses are also often pretty frequent and fast due to bus-only lanes, direct freeway access, etc.

Our roads are often congested. Often any additions focus on HOV lanes.

Once a decent number of people use transit, others follow. It's a catch 22 in reverse.

Greater Seattle has more neighborhoods of high density than anywhere in Texas.