Posted Sat, Mar 31, 6:46 p.m.

And I forgot to mention that, in the eyes of city planners, Northgate's principal function (besides generating sales tax revenues for the city) is to pump thousands of people into downtown offices every day. Indeed, "Northport" would be a more accurate term to describe Northgate, as the planners see it.

Posted Sat, Mar 31, 6:43 p.m.

"The 41 is always going to be faster to downtown than light rail since it has no stops between Northgate and the bus tunnel during rush hour." But it won't be faster than light rail when it's route terminates at the Northgate light rail station. See Rider Alert at http://bit.ly/HvqWQr ...

Posted Sun, Mar 4, 2:30 p.m.

Is it significant that in the article -and the many comments- the word "kids" appears just once? I would suggest it does signify something. I'll leave it to you others to contemplate why.

Posted Fri, Mar 2, 7:49 a.m.

@bkochis a likely answer can be found in this paper. "No One Saw This Coming":Understanding Financial Crisis Through Accounting Models http://bit.ly/wgctVw Bottom-line: the economists' regression-based econometric forecasting models don't work with or recognize stock & flow concepts that underlay the economy, particularly those that went awry in the financial sector.

Posted Fri, Mar 2, 7:30 a.m.

"This article rather lacks in substance." Boy, you can say that again.

Posted Sun, Feb 26, 5:20 p.m.

"I need money for a project, you borrow the money at a low interest rate, I pay you back from the money I make" So, the private, for-profit enterprise gets to access the low interest rate the city enjoys (simply because city bonds -aka municipal bonds- are not subject to ...

Posted Fri, Feb 17, 2:12 p.m.

The first time I met Jim McIntire, he was advising Gov. Gardner's Growth Strategies Commission that the 'secret sauce' for controlling growth was pushing up land prices. That's worked out just hunky-dory hasn't it, Jim? And to think this fellow claims a PhD in economics. More like a PhD in ...

Posted Fri, Feb 10, 3:35 p.m.

Probably. But that doesn't mean the auto ferries should be math-balled. Nor does it mean that passenger-ferries on the downtown Seattle-connected routes should be introduced (or in the case of Bremerton re-introduced) and (here's the downside) run in parallel -and thus in competition- with the auto ferries, each of which ...

Posted Wed, Feb 8, 2:08 p.m.

Thanks to CB Hall, some valuable figures emerge: "The ferry routes, were they roads, would represent about 1.4 percent of the state’s highway network. In the last biennium, however, WSF operations received about 4.5 percent of state funding for highways, while ferry capital needs took another 8 percent." Now, compare ...

Posted Tue, Feb 7, 10:41 a.m.

Mr. Pisano (whom I know only in passing) avers: "and if we do not have higher speed rail in place to move workers (particularly skilled workers) over the longer distances involved, we disadvantage ourselves" Hold on, now. I'm not gonna swallow that one, Mark. Moving workers is not, in and ...

Posted Thu, Jan 26, 10:32 a.m.

Thank you, Larry Cheek for expert insight. I'm confident everything you say is right on point. After decades of state ownership, the WSF and its vessel construction program has been transformed into a union grab-bag. In-state requirements, apprentice programs -- all ready-made sops crafted by an unchallenged Democrat legislature. Watch ...

Posted Sun, Jan 22, 6:17 p.m.

The comments to this piece, "The decline and fall of Seattle", are ample & compelling evidence for Knute's proposition: for the life of me, the comments make little if any sense. They display an abject inability to grasp reality. Such is the disease that has consumed Seattle.

Posted Sun, Jan 22, 6:04 p.m.

mhays posits: "Another point off the unemployment rate might just seal it for Obama." Two points certainly would, but rest assure that neither will happen, m. -------- Richard Borkowski sez: "The Republican party is unstable and incapable of governance" You're misreading the reflection off your mirror, Richard. Go back to ...

Posted Thu, Jan 19, 2:03 p.m.

Deb Eddy observes: "I think as the session continues, the distinction in these two phrases will blur" Isn't that always the case with the legislature?

Posted Thu, Jan 19, 1:47 p.m.

"Taxing in the name of transit around here is many times higher (in absolute terms) than in any of the peer regions" True, but a bit misstated. It's not taxing "in the name of transit", it's taxing "for the benefit of downtown", where transit service and projects are heavily focused ...

Posted Mon, Jan 16, 9:57 a.m.

"..reshape the daily curve of traffic demand. You can then shave the peaks, fill in the valleys, smooth the traffic flow across the day, save fuel and reduce emissions, speed freight, improve the reliability..." ---- "Blah, blah, blah..." An attorney lecturing us on transportation science. How nice. This PR makes ...

Posted Sat, Dec 31, 7:14 p.m.

Replace the state's investment in floating hulls currently deployed on certain central Sound routes (e.g. Edmonds-Kingston, Seattle-Bremerton and possibly Seattle-Bainbridge) with single a cross-Sound bridge between Edmonds and Kingston on the Kitsap Peninsula -- a five-mile crossing. Unfortunately, with $4.3 billion currently being lavished on the replacement for the 520 ...

Posted Sat, Dec 31, 12:22 p.m.

Jan writes: "The Seattle Monorail died because it promised way more than it could actually deliver within the financing that was approved by voters." Gee -- failure to deliver what it promised within the financing approved by voters has never stopped Sound Transit. So why should that standard apply here ...

Posted Fri, Nov 25, 2:40 p.m.

LRT? receives an 'Editor's Pick' yet writes "Now we’re up to 9/10ths [local sales tax] on not one, but two transit agencies stumbling over one another to drum up business." He forgot to double that figure, because KC Metro gets 9/10th for itself and then Sound Transit gets another 9/10ths. ...

Posted Tue, Nov 15, 2:03 p.m.

A friend of the people, and an inspiration.

Posted Sat, Jun 18, 7:27 p.m.

GaryP writes: ([TIF] was explained to me by Joel Horn for the Commons Park Project, and that should have been a red flag in of itself.) OMG! That's a *very* valuable tidbit, Gary. Thank you for sharing. I'll return the favor. I now live in what I call a 'Potemkinville' ...

Posted Sat, Jun 18, 6:58 p.m.

1. Peggy Noonan is entirely correct, folks. We have a president who is entirely non-conversant in economics, just like the majority of folks in his party. 2. Wow, good to see some names of folks I remember, particularly Ross Kane and Doug MacDonald. It's been a long while -- but ...

Posted Sat, Feb 20, 5:46 p.m.

"The median salary at the city is high because most city employees are highly educated." So, let them earn their high pay for a change. They shouldn't have been allowed to become an entitled class, as I think they have. (Besides, shouldn't the 'Mt. Rainier factor' mean they'd be willing ...

Posted Sat, Feb 20, 5:34 p.m.

Chris - you don't appreciate that Washington state is NOT New Jersey, is NOT Virginia, is NOT Massachusetts. Instead, Washington state is, for all intents, Puget Sound and is dominated by the demographic that has descended upon the region in the past 20 years, when we last knew each other. ...

Posted Tue, Dec 22, 7:54 a.m.

I appreciate learning the writer's experiences -- and her moral struggle to adapt to the Seattle way. I think the decision to have her daughter finish her high school back in the Twin Cities is the best solution to a bad situation. But it's evident that the writer certainly learned ...

Posted Tue, Dec 22, 6:59 a.m.

Herb raises a very pertinent point about turnout. How did it vary across the counties? An enterprising researcher might make that turnout data widely available, if only to give ample impetus for encouraging greater electoral participation rates among those outside of the gommorah of King County who may believe their ...

Posted Wed, Jun 10, 7:55 p.m.

Hockey is much, much better in HDTV! (You can see the puck.) Last night's game 6 was superb!!

Posted Wed, Jun 10, 7:40 p.m.

"It has a large, too well paid bureaucracy that feuds and performs sluggishly." A better term is 'bureautocracy' -- to which one pays tribute if one expects to get anything. ---- "It's his turn, [Phillips] almost implies." Didn't Bob Dole play that role once? Didn't work out, if I recall ...

Posted Tue, Aug 12, 7:47 a.m.

RE: Pay as you go, or don't go: . Ken Shear writes: "It seems to me that we should evaluate transportation alternatives objectively, looking at both direct costs and externalities, and one step further, find a way to require that people who engage in an activity like driving pay for ...

Posted Sun, Jul 20, 11:31 a.m.

RE: You make no sense...: . Yes, indeed I can point to such votes (tho' they took place well before I arrived in Seattle). "In a February (1972) referendum prompted by litigation over its design, Seattle voters reject the proposed Bay Freeway, an elevated highway over Mercer Street between I-5 ...

Posted Sun, Jul 20, 5:30 a.m.

RE: You make no sense...: . {cont} But there *can* be standards applied when public $ are involved. Suggesting that new individual roads should "pay their way" would be a rough attempt to impose a standard. I have no problem with applying standards, as the simple effort of developing and ...

Posted Sun, Jul 20, 5:24 a.m.

RE: You make no sense...: . OK, this is a more substantive point, one that leads to further horizons. But let me first assure you that, with respect to the earlier question about whether all transportation outlays are paid for by users, my knowledge and certainty arises from having worked ...

Posted Sat, Jul 19, 9:33 a.m.

RE: You make no sense...: . sorry, make that "multiple hundred MILLION ones provided to ST", not billion... Those grants will nevertheless *sum* to over a billion.

Posted Sat, Jul 19, 6:01 a.m.

RE: You make no sense...: . I was correct in saying that state and federal highway budgets consist of gas tax and related excise taxes. There's some slight variation in how these are assessed in the various states (e.g. I believe truck firms in Oregon prepare & file a weight-distance ...

Posted Fri, Jul 18, 3:27 p.m.

RE: Subsidies to individual car users: . You posted this twice. I replied to the earlier post -- see above.

Posted Fri, Jul 18, 3:19 p.m.

RE: You make no sense...: . That's an interesting piece, but still leaves me puzzled since user fees (gas & vehicle (tire) excise taxes) constitute the sources of ALL state and federal dollars for highway budgets. (In Texas, for whatever reason, it looks like the schools even walk off with ...

Posted Fri, Jul 18, 2:45 p.m.

RE: You make no sense...: . I'd use the word 'disingenuous', not 'inconsistant' (sic). But that would assume that what you claim, i.e. that I've asked others to prove their assertions, is correct. I don't recall that I have done as you say. My posts have mostly offered facts that ...

Posted Thu, Jul 17, 4:02 p.m.

RE: You make no sense...: . Yeah, that sounds about right for you. Fact is fact, truth is truth - whether you know of it or not. Trees that fall in the forest DO make a noise. Your thoughts are private, unreviewed and unpublished. That doesn't make them "worthless". I ...

Posted Thu, Jul 17, 11:43 a.m.

RE: You make no sense...: . As my own calculation, it is private and doesn't need to be published. (Although maybe you'll want to subpeona me.) But you didn't read my post well enough, Matt. I didn't say "such a system only benefits commuters" (even though it's principally designed for ...

Posted Thu, Jul 17, 11:31 a.m.

RE: Choice: . No, it makes me understand that some can personally find buses of no or little utility. But that doesn't mean buses are of no value to others or can't meet the needs of a larger cross-section of the commuting public than can a single rail line shuttling ...

Posted Wed, Jul 16, 8:46 p.m.

RE: Choice: . I walk. I live in a downtown district.

Posted Wed, Jul 16, 8:44 p.m.

RE: Choice: . That comment was illogical. And it still is. Parsing it won't make it otherwise. -- "Buses are viewed differently from rail by potential users, and ignoring that simply ignores reality." So, Daniel McFadden's Nobel Prize in Economics was fraudulent? Buses and rail are different modes, but potential ...

Posted Wed, Jul 16, 7:57 p.m.

RE: You make no sense...: . remove the space between soundoff and /comment and you'll get there. (Crosscut prohibits long words.) Where do I say Forward Thrust couldn't be presented (what's that mean?) the same way as ST2? Define cost-effective and we can take a shot at comparing light rail ...

Posted Wed, Jul 16, 7:45 p.m.

RE: Tired old car warriors: . All he's said is I'm wedded to the automobile age and throw up smokescreens, misleading statistics and conspiracy theories. I'm not responsible for his perceptions. OK, OK if you insist -- I plead guilty to being an Enemy of the State. Should I throw ...

Posted Wed, Jul 16, 7:37 p.m.

RE: Your creds: . "How 'bout you? I haven't heard you respond to tommie and Matt's questions regarding your bus usage. Or do you just call yourself an expert in this field because you sit behind the computer and read about it all day" I haven't seen their questions. I ...

Posted Wed, Jul 16, 7:28 p.m.

RE: Good try: . Sounds like you're doing the bragging for me, Mad. I offered some credentials and you shlt on them. Nice. Why don't you toss yours into the mix and allow me to comment on their relevance to the issue? Or are you afraid you'd be identified? (It's ...

Posted Wed, Jul 16, 7:19 p.m.

RE: Manhattanization: . BenSchneidelman sneers: "I really don't care what someone on an internet forum has as a "standard"." Then why would you expect me -or anyone- to acknowledge yours? Nice attitude. P.S. Forty years ago, I was in high school. Outside of Chicago. So that makes me responsible for ...

Posted Wed, Jul 16, 7:04 p.m.

RE: You make no sense...: . It's my own calculation, employing the very same impact fee methodology & assumptions underlying school impact fees under GMA. I produced that number about seven years ago, pouring ST's financial plan into the spreadsheet I modified, from specific application to school fees (I formerly ...

Posted Wed, Jul 16, 12:24 p.m.

RE: You make no sense...: . oops, I blew that. Should read "inquiring minds want to know."

Posted Wed, Jul 16, 11:07 a.m.

RE: You make no sense...: . "...the 87c per trip the city of San Francisco pays to BART, offsetting the "benefit to the city" that you seem to have such a problem with." I know nothing of that. I'm curious as to its history and purpose. Has this been around ...

Posted Wed, Jul 16, 9:25 a.m.

RE: You make no sense...: . So, too, are all ST's bonds at or under 5%. If you then want to claim that borrowing at 5% to incur costs today that are escalating at 10-15% constitutes a bargain ("discount"), then be my guest. The interest rate at which you borrow ...

Posted Wed, Jul 16, 7:25 a.m.

RE: You make no sense...: . Ben Scheidelman sez: "As inflation today is far higher than the bond rate would have been in 1985, we actually would be receiving a discount. Cool!" Huh? That's just another incorrect statement. The market rate on 20-year municipal bonds in 1985 hovered around 9%. ...

Posted Wed, Jul 16, 5:51 a.m.

RE: Choice: . "Buses are only an attractive option for the people who don't use them. (I know very few people who take the bus to work, and we're right downtown.)" The first sentence is clearly illogical. How can an attractive option not be used by the people to whom ...

Posted Wed, Jul 16, 5:44 a.m.

RE: Tired old car warriors: . tiptoe: before you continue your prattle about Niles and myself, why don't you back up your allegations with actual evidence -- words one or both of us have offered? Where have we said anything that suggests we're anti-transit and exclusively in favor of more ...

Posted Wed, Jul 16, 5:28 a.m.

RE: Your creds: . No, you've got experienced folks who have fled from the lunacy. And still-wet-behind-the-ear-children running the asylum. Not a good prospect at all. And no, I haven't been to Fruitvale (and I'll admit it's been quite awhile since I visited BART). But Wiki tells me it took ...

Posted Tue, Jul 15, 8:37 p.m.

RE: You make no sense...: . Ben Sheidelman writes: "just expanding I-405 on the eastside is an $11 billion project to add some 50,000 people per day in capacity" I guess you didn't read my rejoinder to this erroneous interpretation the other day when you posted this same misinformation in ...

Posted Tue, Jul 15, 8:23 p.m.

RE: ound 3: . "Too much public policy is built on tenuous extrapolation of expert analysis that some people cherry-pick to suit their biases." Beautifully said, dn!!

Posted Tue, Jul 15, 8:18 p.m.

RE: Good try: . I don't need to do an internet search, Wes. I've got over thirty years of accumulated experience and study in this and related areas. And I've talked in person with Bob Cervero a couple of times in the past four years. How 'bout you?

Posted Tue, Jul 15, 8:15 p.m.

RE: Manhattanization: . I'm not a critic, Mr. MadisonAve -- just someone who applies a different standard than do you. If you wish to prove that there is an inescapable need for bus-only or HOV lanes on a new, expanded 520, then I'll listen to you. But please present some ...

Posted Tue, Jul 15, 8:04 p.m.

RE: You make no sense...: {cont} Your illustration that with density, there may be a lower per capita demand for infrastructure is not sufficient reason to require al l members of society be subjected to your preferred levels of "efficiency" and "density". You should put that question to the people ...

Posted Tue, Jul 15, 8:03 p.m.

RE: You make no sense...: I read your response. And you remain incorrect asserting "that vote [1968's 51%] would have approved a system." The super-majority would STILL apply today for the financing method proposed (bonds). You seem to be suffering from some fundamental misunderstanding/ misperception on this point. You wrote: ...

Posted Tue, Jul 15, 4:06 p.m.

RE: You make no sense...: . 1) 60% *is* a super-majority. A majority is 50% +1. Any higher hurdle constitutes a super-majority. 2) Jim Ellis last year made the unsupported claim in the press that the Forward Thrust bonds would have been paid off last year. His memory likely was ...

Posted Tue, Jul 15, 3:42 p.m.

RE: You make no sense...: . Huh? 1989's CAP and 30-65 foot height limits were the reason for lack of development in the Rainier Valley? Ri-i-i-ght, uh-huh. I'll give you two more guesses. Your reply nonetheless serves to illustrate what your advocacy of rail aims at: increased density. (Which you ...

Posted Tue, Jul 15, 3:34 p.m.

RE: Buses can't meet the need: . hoohah exclaims: "Buses work only if you create new right-of-way" Well, I guess that depends on what the meaning of 'work' is. Care to share that with the rest of us? Or is that simply a bumper sticker slogan? Don't ST's buses carry ...

Posted Tue, Jul 15, 1:14 p.m.

RE: Buses can't meet the need: blukoff: the idea of running rail in the median of the interstate goes back to the 1950's.

Posted Tue, Jul 15, 1:12 p.m.

RE: You make no sense...: Ben Shiendelman writes: "the majority of voters approved of Forward Thrust. We just had a rule that was later disposed of " I presume you're referring to the super-majority voter approval requirement the two Forward Thrust proposals failed to achieve. (Also, please note that the ...

Posted Tue, Jul 15, 1:12 p.m.

RE: You make no sense...: {continued} The only cost, to the property owner, associated with the benefit bestowed upon them is a slightly higher (~1.2% of the added value) annual property tax. That's a pretty low cost of capital, eh? (That's even better that what the Federal Reserve is granting ...

Posted Thu, Jun 26, 10:20 a.m.

RE: Thanks to the former Tom Heller!: You're welcome, deb. (re: East LINK vs. 405 comparison) I agree with the fundamental criticism of ST expressed by Sec. MacDonald, Rep. Eddy and others: It takes too much MONEY, too much TIME and does FAR TOO LITTLE. -- Transit Guy sez that ...

Posted Thu, Jun 26, 8:06 a.m.

RE: Can't politicians be honest AND get re-elected?: Frank: your statistical comparison of East Link LRT with 405 is faulty. You've mistaken a highway "screenline" volume for a facility volume. While East Link LRT may be forecast to serve 45,000 rides (not riders) a day sometime out beyond the end ...

Posted Wed, Apr 23, 5:13 p.m.

RE: McDonald: Doug: Former WSDOT Secretary MacDonald was *NOT* involved in the Big Dig fiasco. Instead, he was the head of Boston's water treatment authority, the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority, engaged in cleaning up Boston Harbor & environs.

Posted Tue, Apr 22, 5:19 p.m.

RE: Governance reform is a bad deal: Tukwila, if memory serves me, was/is a designated Urban Center under King County's Comprehensive Plan. Under Puget Sound Regional Council's (PSRC) Vision 20/20 regional plan, High-Capacity Transit (HCT) was intended to inter-connect these Urban Centers as the region's future dense employment & residential ...

Posted Tue, Apr 22, 4:58 p.m.

RE: Citations provided: My comments re: disproportionality were intended on a MACRO (e.g. systems) level. You raise a MICRO comparison (e.g. side-by-side of an apple to an orange) in the hope of refuting my macro disproportionality claim. But it doesn't; the figures are clear on this (see, for example, Prop ...

Posted Tue, Apr 22, 6:10 a.m.

RE: Citations provided: You may be missing the financial aspect of the point Rossi expresses. How affordable -indeed sustainable- is any strategy/policy of "rewarding people" for what is deemed the "proper way to commute"? When a disproportionately large shares of the region's (or state's) transportation investment dollars are devoted to ...

Posted Mon, Apr 21, 6:56 p.m.

RE: Citations provided: So, you chide them when they're both engaged in putting themselves -and their proposals- up for a vote? Isn't that how public decisions tend to get made? Or do you think they're just 'horning in' on ST's turf? (no pun intended) and btw: are you still employed ...

Posted Mon, Apr 21, 4:32 p.m.

RE: Governance reform is a bad deal: . hoohah thinks "having the Sound Transit board made up of elected city council members, county council members and county executives encourages cooperation and coordination between Sound Transit and the many cities and towns it travels through." Yeah, right. Saying it's so doesn't ...

Posted Mon, Apr 21, 4:12 p.m.

RE: Ted Van Dyk response: When attributing (above) certain positions re: HOV lanes and bus riders to Mr. Rossi and Mr. Eyman, Mr R P on Beacon Hill should follow the same standard he employs to denigrate Mr. Van Dyke's comments, to wit: ."He should've done some basic fact-checking with ...

Posted Sat, Jan 26, 3:52 p.m.

It's a real estate game, CR: Ockham's Razor applies: the Mayor's preference for a tunnel replacement (and to some degree, the surface option too) is motivated by a desire to bring land from 2nd down to the waterfront into dense development. Think condos, hotels, office buildings. There's huge economic attraction ...

Posted Thu, Dec 13, 4:16 p.m.

And besides, it was (is) *downtown* centric, not 'Seattle' centric...: ST's light rail wouldn't do anything good for Seattle's outlying neighborhoods, with the possible exception of the redevelopment & gentrification of the long-neglected Rainier Valley. For instance, it would reduce Northgate into serving simply as a 'port', through which ten ...

Posted Thu, Dec 13, 3:47 p.m.

It would NOT have been paid off in 2008, David: The ballot title for 1968's Proposition 1 ('Metro Public Transportation Bonds') reads, in relevant part: "Shall Metro perform the function of metropolitan public transportation, adopt & carry out the Comprehensive Transportation Plan and issue, over 17 years, General Obligation bonds ...

Posted Sun, Jun 24, 8:52 a.m.

RE: How much do roads cost us?: addendum to provide an illustration to clarify that the 'residual' valuation placed on land via the assessment process doesn't present a clear measure of genuine land value (and hence can't be used to determine the 'cost' of roads): One home, on the market ...

Posted Sun, Jun 24, 7:02 a.m.

RE: How much do roads cost us?: 1. There is *no* land on QA that carries a separate price from what sits on it. The assessor's valuation by law is an equation (Total = Land + Improvements) which forces the assessor to place a 'number' on the land. But that ...

Posted Fri, Jun 22, 1:45 p.m.

RE: This isn't helping: addendum to above: What is the problem you're trying to solve, "speeding up trips on often congested thoroughfares, especially at peak hours"? Is that the 'problem' or simply a symptom of another condition? Because if it's a symptom, why not address the underlying condition?

Posted Fri, Jun 22, 12:39 p.m.

RE: This isn't helping: . "(rail isn't about replacing all trips, it's about speeding up trips on often congested thoroughfares, especially at peak hours)" No one has said rail is about replacing all trips. Not even its most die-hard proponents. Could you elaborate on which "trips on congested thoroughfares" are ...

Posted Fri, Jun 22, 11:03 a.m.

RE: Beyond Hopeless: . "This seems to be a generational thing. Most of the people bashing this plan are old farts who really don't have any better ideas and who really haven't learned anything new in over 30 years of fighting." No, we're trying to apply time-tested principles (e.g. cost-effectiveness, ...

Posted Fri, Jun 22, 9:12 a.m.

RE: There is no Silver Bullet: . --- If you check the chart, which is for one year only, of course, you will see gas taxes pay 51% of costs. The rest come from a variety of sources, but much of it is out of general fund, OK, this is ...

Posted Fri, Jun 22, 6:46 a.m.

RE: How much do roads cost us?: . I should have taken critique of your ruminations predicated on an assumed "$150/sf 'cost' for land on QA further.... While the KC Assessor's data may indicate that is the average 'value' of the land piece of an average home's assessed value, it's ...

Posted Fri, Jun 22, 6:19 a.m.

RE: How much do roads cost us?: I appreciate your clarification. But how relevant is even your $1.1 B figure? That assumes the public has paid that much to build QA's street network, but that would be untrue. Whatever it cost, it is now a sunk cost. Your $1.1 billion ...

Posted Fri, Jun 22, 5:47 a.m.

RE: There is no Silver Bullet: . "Make no mistake- Light Rail is expensive, both in real dollars and in per trip costs. I am not denying that. I am merely stating that we DO subsidise other modes, and we should take that into account when deciding whether or not ...

Posted Fri, Jun 22, 5:20 a.m.

RE: more malarky from Morrill...: . The acuity of your perception is seriously flawed, apparently obscured by a stubborn adherence to some religious-like precept. "I don't see such a distinction between roads and rail. Yes, roads are more useful. But also more expensive. Plus we already have roads, and we're ...

Posted Thu, Jun 21, 8:56 p.m.

RE: This isn't helping: . further on Dr. Morrill...and because you likely missed the post way above by dltooley of Tacoma, I'll paste it here for your edification: "I took a class from Dr. Morrill. I only remember one lecture well, one that is relevant to this subject. He compared ...

Posted Thu, Jun 21, 8:49 p.m.

RE: This isn't helping: . "Has he ever been on 520 during rush hour? Has he ever heard the phrase "park and ride"? Has he considered that someone might take a bus to a rail corridor, the same way they transfer from bus to bus today? Has he ever visited ...

Posted Thu, Jun 21, 8:39 p.m.

RE: How much do roads cost us?: . "Value of land increases with the quality of life of those living there" Who said that? (Even if it were so, which one is the chicken and which is the egg?) You may be mistaking correlation for causation. I suspect you're struggling ...

Posted Thu, Jun 21, 8:16 p.m.

RE: There is no Silver Bullet: . You're assuming that the $11 million grant toward SeaTac's third runway mentioned in Patty Murray's press release (http://murray.senate.gov/news.cfm?id=219339) comes from the fed's general fund (i.e. income taxes, etc.) - and hence would represent a subsidy from non-users. But the press release doesn't say ...

Posted Thu, Jun 21, 12:49 p.m.

RE: This isn't helping: . And your counter-argument is what?

Posted Thu, Jun 21, 12:41 p.m.

RE: more malarky from Morrill...: . What's different is that unlike light rail, roads do not bestow their benefit on a narrow slice of people and property owners. It's a matter of equity. Roads, both as individual links and in sum as a ubiquitous network blanketing the region, are open ...

Posted Thu, Jun 21, 7:52 a.m.

RE: more malarky from Morrill...: . One last thought: Please don't presume that everything would be just hunky-dory if everyone lived, worked, played, etc at 'common endpoints' at the end of a pipeline. We're human beings, for lord's sake, not fecal matter! We don't aspire to live in Blade Runner ...

Posted Thu, Jun 21, 7:29 a.m.

RE: How much do roads cost us?: . I should have been more specific about what allows for that $250/sf land cost on upper QA. Not only does the street network on QA help to allow those land values, but so do the connections that street network offers to the ...

Posted Thu, Jun 21, 7 a.m.

RE: more malarky from Morrill...: . (cont'd from above) But do the math: a $1 million increase in AV will be taxed at 1.2% (Seattle's approx. property tax rate), so that's $12,000 higher taxes annually in return for a $1 million boost in the property owner's equity in the property ...

Posted Thu, Jun 21, 6:59 a.m.

RE: more malarky from Morrill...: Matt: "What makes mass transit a good solution is having a common endpoint - once you're in the city most people don't need to travel anywhere else." ---- OK, with that in mind, take it another step: WHO is it a good solution for? Like ...

Posted Thu, Jun 21, 1:10 a.m.

RE: There is no Silver Bullet: . Ries again flails: "When I say they are hidden, I mean to people like Stuka, who thinks that Light Rail trips cost 20 bucks each." What the hell does that sentence say? Nothing at all, other than you have a problem with 1) ...

Posted Thu, Jun 21, 12:42 a.m.

RE: Hey jamier ...: Stuka writes: "he adds up three different numbers for the three different methods of transport. not clear that they are mutually exclusive, but they do seem to add up (I didn't actually add them, but they do appear to be legitimate numbers)." ---- All numbers are ...

Posted Wed, Jun 20, 5:12 p.m.

RE: How much do roads cost us?: Matt once again engages in first-order 'analysis': "...upper Queen Anne hill alone [is] about a mile wide and a mile long, with about 20 blocks in either direction. Streets are about 35' wide. 5280' x 35' x 20 x 2 = 7,392,000 sf ...

Posted Wed, Jun 20, 4:50 p.m.

RE: more malarky from Morrill...: . Matt again: "I know exactly where they're coming from and to when we're talking about any given pipeline. On I-90 about half are coming from the east side of the lake to the west. The rest are coming from the west to the east. ...

Posted Wed, Jun 20, 1:53 p.m.

RE: There is no Silver Bullet: . Ries remarks: "..every working urban rapid transit system in the world uses some combination of trains and bus. And every one of them subsidises the fare, often to the tune of large dollar amounts- because the other costs, the ones that congestion charges, ...

Posted Wed, Jun 20, 1:47 p.m.

RE: more malarky from Morrill...: . Matt explains: "//Hence, downtown Seattle consumes virtually all the freeway capacity// This is exactly why mass-transit works for cities. Almost everyone is going to the same place. You can either take up 100 sf of space per person on a massive pipeline into the ...

Posted Wed, Jun 20, 1:31 p.m.

Morrill "is almost single-handedly responsible for today's mess"?: . Uncle Mike derisively writes: "Morrill knee-capped transportation planning in Seattle for 20 years. He is almost single handedly responsible for today's mess. (...) Morrill has never understood the most basic principles of transportation planning." -------- Baloney - and you know it. ...

Posted Wed, Jun 20, 1:27 p.m.

RE: more malarky from Morrill...: . jamier claims: "A total of 26.2% of Seattlites either walk, bus, or ride a bike to work" and then concludes: "Downtown/density is not a transportation problem, it's a solution." That's baloney, too. Don't cite something from The Stranger, go the the real data source: ...

Posted Wed, Jun 20, 8:56 a.m.

RE: more malarky from Morrill...: . Uncle Mike derisively writes: Morrill knee-capped transportation planning in Seattle for 20 years. He is almost single handedly responsible for today's mess. (...) Morrill has never understood the most basic principles of transportation planning. -------- Baloney - and you know it. (Besides, when does ...

Posted Mon, Apr 9, 6:17 a.m.

Berk & Associates' logic is absurd: Following Berk & Associates' "logic", taxpayers should give the Port of Seattle a $40 BILLION new 'arena'. (This more concisely restates the jist of my previous post.)

Posted Sun, Apr 8, 11:12 a.m.

I voted for Sound Transit...and all I got was this lousy bike lane: (I didn't, but many did...) Could it be that all the money being gobbled up by Sound Transit *could* have gone toward improving transit across and around Seattle, including better & more frequent E-W services? Just a ...

Posted Sun, Apr 8, 11:05 a.m.

Yep, Berk IS baloney (but baloney pays well): Patricia is correct. Berk & Associates is a handy go-to local consultant for quickie "analyses" justifying the latest rip-off of local taxpayers. (Hey, it's a fast-growing market, you know!) What I like to do is compare the projected economic impacts of professional ...