Comments on: Light Rail Along Road Rights-of-Way: a Cheap Solution to an Expensive Proposition

By: Drewski

Drewski — Fri, 29 Oct 2010 03:39:27 +0000

@poncho–The Canada Line is a poor example. You neglect to mention that the insistence on PPP for the line resulted in a consortium using heavy-rail subway cars from Rotem, incompatible with Bombardier-built SkyTrain cars (with linear induction propulsion). Also, the stations on the Canada Line were built with short platforms to save money. The line is way too close to reaching design capacity, and reconstruction of stations to allow 4-car trains has been estimated as costing at least 40% of original construction cost. Also, the difficulty of reclaiming that lost capacity will likely force construction of either streetcar or LRT in the Arbutus corridor, and sooner than anticipated, so the total infrastructure cost for moving the same design capacity will be significantly more than the MAX line in question.

This Seattle proposal–is this intended to be streetcar, permanently distinct from LINK? Or is it intended to be an introductory service, intended to be upgraded incrementally to light rail? Large parts of Seattle are built on clay, and a line built for a single articulated streetcar won’t have the load-bearing capacity to carry a 4-car light rail train. Factors like curve radius, grade, and track spacing would have to be considered. An at-grade line with light rail geometry can be designed to accommodate grade separation in the future, but the provision doesn’t mean it can’t start as a streetcar.

By: Chetan

Chetan — Sun, 04 Apr 2010 04:25:49 +0000

Andrew,

I would totally support that in theory, and money shouldn’t a be problem, considering how much the state pays for roads. But the state has regulation that is tying us up. We should start here, and improve transit bit by bit. Thats what even London and New York did.

By: poncho

poncho — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 18:30:28 +0000

The entirely grade seperated Canada Line (adjusted for miles and USD) is cheaper per mile than the proposed at-grade Portland-Milwaukie MAX line which is almost all at grade. I think we have come to the point where after utility relocation, building small inefficient couple block long segments at a time, full street width recontructions, working around business concerns and holidays, traffic remediation, etc that the costs for at-grade rail lines start to become comparible to grade seperated lines. I believe bored tunnel through a hillside is the cheapest rail line per mile to build.

Yonah, another example of Seattle proposing to take away auto lanes is on Broadway on First & Capitol Hills…
http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/03/25/two-way-broadway-cross-sections/

By: Greg

Greg — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 17:23:51 +0000

“And that city’s similarly pioneering streetcar includes several segments completely separated from the street.”

Portland’s MAX is not at all pioneering. It is referred to as the ‘Karlsruhe Model’ – using trams on both heavy-rail ROW’s and on inter-city, at grade streets. This sort of transportation integration is not new to America, either. I’m kind of disappointed that you forgot to mention this little tidbit. Otherwise, I really enjoy your blogs.

By: Chris Stefan

Chris Stefan — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 08:13:05 +0000

Serial,
A majority of the density on and around Queen Anne Hill is right at the Southern base of the Hill in the Uptown area. You certainly can swing through the Uptown/Seattle Center area before heading out to Elliot and 15th.

True the top of the Hill does have an urban village but it in no way has the density to justify the expense of an underground light rail line to serve it.

Serving Ballard via the Elliot/15th corridor is a plan that has been talked about off and on for at least 45 years. This corridor was part of the Forward Thrust plan, the monorail plan, the City ICT studies, etc.

The travel demand between Ballard and downtown is much greater than an E/W corridor to the University. So connecting to downtown first makes sense. Past that an E/W line to the UW through Wallingford makes a certain amount of sense as does continuing up 15th to Crown Hill then swinging East to connect to Greenwood, Aurora, Northgate, and Lake City (see the city ICT study). The route to Northgate has the advantage of wider street ROW for most of the route and a more favorable topography.

By: Kay

Kay — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 05:32:24 +0000

Unless they build another bridge over the Duwamish River for the light rail they are going to have a terrible bottleneck on the West Seattle bridge if they take out any traffic lanes to devote to rail

By: serial catowner

serial catowner — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 22:01:54 +0000

There’s a long stretch from West Seattle over Harbor Island where you could run 50 mph if you wanted to- and this would really cut the commute times for people in West Seattle.

By: serial catowner

serial catowner — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 21:57:26 +0000

My points were-

a) going around the base of Queen Anne hill is not going “through” Queen Anne. Going out Elliot and up 15th misses a huge segment of Queen Anne and Westlake misses even more. That’s fine as long as you’re under no illusions that you’re going “through” Queen Anne.

b) these are actually two different lines we’re talking about (West Seattle-City Center) and Ballard. But for starters, where should the Ballard Line go? Maybe to the University. It makes sense to talk about buying the same cars and overhead for both lines, but each will be better if it is considered independently of the other.

By: Spokker

Spokker — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 04:21:44 +0000

In LA I like to drive next to the Blue Line and the East LA Gold Line for fun and see if I get hit and die. I’m not dead yet!

By: Mad Park

Mad Park — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 01:15:46 +0000

What part of “grade separated” and “the cheapskate always pays the most” don’t people understand?
The one advantage Seattle has in being 25-40 years behind many other cities is that we can learn from their experiences: so let’s PLEASE tax ourselves enough to spend the requisite amount of money to build it right, from the start – grade separated. But let’s also be clear that the other in-city routing needs must be considered and a prioritised list created before we jump in and go to WS and Ballard just because we think it’d be cool. The routing through Downtown must be decided first and foremost.