Bellevue Light Rail/East Link thread - Page 5

CityView Jim · February 14th, 2010, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rathersmart

my last one was: where in South America is Bulgaria?

I think the Bellevue line should be built in parallel with the seattle line. start building now and then connect later

It hasn't even been designed yet, land acquired, etc. YEARS away from seeing anything.

just4ivaylo · February 15th, 2010, 02:51 AM

Haha. :P

That's an interesting idea. Would it work though? I mean, the ridership of the Bellevue line would be quiet low in comparison to the one in Seattle, and it might sort of defeat the purpose of having light rail anyways.

alexjonlin · February 15th, 2010, 03:10 AM

They haven't gotten to an advanced enough level of design to start building it yet.

Subterranean Alien · February 15th, 2010, 10:45 AM

it'd be such a waste of money to have a station on the edge of the already tiny and pedestrian unfriendly car centric city of Bellevue. If they want that, I'd rather we invest that money to connect West Seattle and Ballard Neighborhood. Give connections to neighborhoods that actually wants them. Bellevue is too car centric and backwards to ever see it done properly. I'm so proud of Sound Transit and Seattle for the first initial, albeit limited, light rail. It will pave the way to a denser, and more sustainable city. It would be Bellevue's loss to shun Sound Transit. They will lose a chance to bring more people to their small town. However wider their roads will be can never bring the capacity a mass transit system can bring to a region...and as ST's light rail system grows on the west side, extending to the already populated Capitol Hill and UDist, more and more people will live in this corridor.

HAWC1506 · February 16th, 2010, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Subterranean Alien

it'd be such a waste of money to have a station on the edge of the already tiny and pedestrian unfriendly car centric city of Bellevue. If they want that, I'd rather we invest that money to connect West Seattle and Ballard Neighborhood. Give connections to neighborhoods that actually wants them. Bellevue is too car centric and backwards to ever see it done properly. I'm so proud of Sound Transit and Seattle for the first initial, albeit limited, light rail. It will pave the way to a denser, and more sustainable city. It would be Bellevue's loss to shun Sound Transit. They will lose a chance to bring more people to their small town. However wider their roads will be can never bring the capacity a mass transit system can bring to a region...and as ST's light rail system grows on the west side, extending to the already populated Capitol Hill and UDist, more and more people will live in this corridor.

Rail transportation is as much of a catalyst for development as it is a transportation tool. If it's there, Bellevue will grow around it. If it's not there, it will have to be built in the future anyway. The question is how long you're willing to wait until Bellevue eats itself with car-centricity.

alexjonlin · February 16th, 2010, 11:28 AM

The thing is, if it is built at the freeway, development will only grow around one side of it, as the freeway creates a huge barrier, even if there are nice, safe pedestrian bridges over it and everything.

RMacherat · February 16th, 2010, 09:46 PM

I don't think it will be that long before we can wean the eastsiders from their cars

For instance, think of the possibilities for use of the space taken up by garages in this home.

meku · February 16th, 2010, 10:34 PM

Auto Workshop ! Oh, wait...

mhays · February 16th, 2010, 11:09 PM

Don't worry about the Eastside too much. They're developing a variety of dense mixed-use nodes. Not just Downtown Bellevue but Downtown Mercer Island (today), Downtown Redmond (today), and the Bel-Red Corridor (in the next boom). Given the pace of infill so far, it's easy to imagine a good critical mass at each of these locations before rail shows up in the early 20s. The SFR residents will be a part of the rail ridership, but they don't need to be the core part.

Second, a sizeable part of the ridership for East Link will be people commuting from Seattle to jobs on the Eastside. By US suburban standards, our region's office jobs are admirably concentrated, many within walking distance of the planned East Link stations.

jessejb · February 17th, 2010, 02:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BellevueGuy

Just wondering....does this kind of remark make any sense except making yourself look like a loser?

Im not trying to be rude. Its actually true.

But not just to Eastsiders. I have friends in Seattle who don't even know what Columbia City is. And damned if theyre going to do any research. Its just the way people are now. You have to rub their face in it if you want anyone to learn about anything that isn't in their front yard.

urbanlife78 · February 17th, 2010, 04:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jessejb

Im not trying to be rude. Its actually true.

But not just to Eastsiders. I have friends in Seattle who don't even know what Columbia City is. And damned if theyre going to do any research. Its just the way people are now. You have to rub their face in it if you want anyone to learn about anything that isn't in their front yard.

or hope the information they are looking up on wikipedia is accurate.

Backstrom · February 18th, 2010, 06:02 AM

For those who can make it, I'd urge you to come out to ST's open house for its downtown alignment tomorrow from 4-7pm. Don't expect much in the way of things accomplished. Expect a lot of people supporting the C9T tunnel, several out for C11A, some strongly against C11A, even more against C9A, and a whole load of people asking what the hell C14E is doing so far away from downtown.

That being said, my sole mission tomorrow is to seek and destroy C14E. There will be several Surrey Downs/Freeman-friendly/EBA-type folks out saying how great the Vision Line is and how it will be so cheap and avoids impacts. But cold hard facts completely slam down this alignment, despite the fact that Wallace continues to push it with consultants and money, even as a freshman senator. He's biting off more than he can chew.

HAWC1506 · February 18th, 2010, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Backstrom

For those who can make it, I'd urge you to come out to ST's open house for its downtown alignment tomorrow from 4-7pm. Don't expect much in the way of things accomplished. Expect a lot of people supporting the C9T tunnel, several out for C11A, some strongly against C11A, even more against C9A, and a whole load of people asking what the hell C14E is doing so far away from downtown.

That being said, my sole mission tomorrow is to seek and destroy C14E. There will be several Surrey Downs/Freeman-friendly/EBA-type folks out saying how great the Vision Line is and how it will be so cheap and avoids impacts. But cold hard facts completely slam down this alignment, despite the fact that Wallace continues to push it with consultants and money, even as a freshman senator. He's biting off more than he can chew.

Where is it?

Backstrom · February 18th, 2010, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HAWC1506

Where is it?

Same place as the last one. City Hall, first floor concourse. You can enter from NE 4th and 112th or NE 6th and 110th (TC access).

Backstrom · February 19th, 2010, 05:45 PM

Wow, that open house was a total dud. I went with HAWC, but nothing of terrible significance came to light. Vision Line people were handing little slips of paper asking for support of B7 and C14E, and they were giving out candy as a bonus. There weren't any harsh criticisms in the public questions or anything. Way I see it, ST looks to be riding on a fully charged path to picking either C11A or C9T.

HAWC1506 · February 19th, 2010, 09:48 PM

It was actually quite amusing to hear the way they gave the presentation.

It almost seemed like: "C14E provides significant savings...however [insert all disadvantages here]."

You can hear them trying to be neutral in the presentation, yet they still end up bashing C14E, whether intentionally or unintentionally. Guess there's no other choice when the comparison numbers are right in front of you. Wish I recorded it.

Backstrom · February 20th, 2010, 12:25 AM

A very old gentlemen asked a hilarious question at the end. "Will any of the downtown stations provide parking? Some of us would like to drive into downtown to take the light rail system!"

urbanlife78 · February 20th, 2010, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Backstrom

A very old gentlemen asked a hilarious question at the end. "Will any of the downtown stations provide parking? Some of us would like to drive into downtown to take the light rail system!"

By some of us, does he mean the ones that would be driving into downtown Bellevue to get wasted and wanting a ride home via light rail?

because that would make sense.

Or was he referring to downtown Bellevue should be a big park and ride to get to downtown Seattle?

SoloSides · February 20th, 2010, 10:11 PM

If the hopes for light rail is to reduce congestion, any surface option in bellevue would be pouring more as into the fire. The streets of bellevue already have insane traffic and the light rail will not take all of those drivers off of the road, only a small percentage. So anything on the surface would make already horrible traffic many times worse.

Seasun · February 20th, 2010, 11:48 PM

Light rail and transit in general should never be expected to reduce congestion - pisses me off when politicians and media imply otherwise - but it also shouldn't make traffic worse (including traffic like buses). Transit increases the capacity to move people and provides a great travel option for some people. Putting rail on Bellevue streets is a joke (or any city's streets) unless it's called a streetcar or trolley.

February 18th, 2010, 06:02 AM	#92
Backstrom Neanderthal Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 963 Likes (Received): 0	For those who can make it, I'd urge you to come out to ST's open house for its downtown alignment tomorrow from 4-7pm. Don't expect much in the way of things accomplished. Expect a lot of people supporting the C9T tunnel, several out for C11A, some strongly against C11A, even more against C9A, and a whole load of people asking what the hell C14E is doing so far away from downtown. That being said, my sole mission tomorrow is to seek and destroy C14E. There will be several Surrey Downs/Freeman-friendly/EBA-type folks out saying how great the Vision Line is and how it will be so cheap and avoids impacts. But cold hard facts completely slam down this alignment, despite the fact that Wallace continues to push it with consultants and money, even as a freshman senator. He's biting off more than he can chew. __________________ Seattle Transit Blog

February 19th, 2010, 05:45 PM	#95
Backstrom Neanderthal Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 963 Likes (Received): 0	Wow, that open house was a total dud. I went with HAWC, but nothing of terrible significance came to light. Vision Line people were handing little slips of paper asking for support of B7 and C14E, and they were giving out candy as a bonus. There weren't any harsh criticisms in the public questions or anything. Way I see it, ST looks to be riding on a fully charged path to picking either C11A or C9T. __________________ Seattle Transit Blog

February 20th, 2010, 12:25 AM	#97
Backstrom Neanderthal Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 963 Likes (Received): 0	A very old gentlemen asked a hilarious question at the end. "Will any of the downtown stations provide parking? Some of us would like to drive into downtown to take the light rail system!" __________________ Seattle Transit Blog

February 20th, 2010, 10:11 PM	#99
SoloSides Registered Seattlite Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 46 Likes (Received): 0	If the hopes for light rail is to reduce congestion, any surface option in bellevue would be pouring more as into the fire. The streets of bellevue already have insane traffic and the light rail will not take all of those drivers off of the road, only a small percentage. So anything on the surface would make already horrible traffic many times worse. __________________ Seattle needs a better light[heavy] rail

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

February 15th, 2010, 02:51 AM	#82
just4ivaylo Registered User Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Bellevue, WA Posts: 1,968 Likes (Received): 29	Haha. :P That's an interesting idea. Would it work though? I mean, the ridership of the Bellevue line would be quiet low in comparison to the one in Seattle, and it might sort of defeat the purpose of having light rail anyways.

February 15th, 2010, 03:10 AM	#83
alexjonlin Registered User Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 2,248 Likes (Received): 82	They haven't gotten to an advanced enough level of design to start building it yet.

February 15th, 2010, 10:45 AM	#84
Subterranean Alien Registered User Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 94 Likes (Received): 0	it'd be such a waste of money to have a station on the edge of the already tiny and pedestrian unfriendly car centric city of Bellevue. If they want that, I'd rather we invest that money to connect West Seattle and Ballard Neighborhood. Give connections to neighborhoods that actually wants them. Bellevue is too car centric and backwards to ever see it done properly. I'm so proud of Sound Transit and Seattle for the first initial, albeit limited, light rail. It will pave the way to a denser, and more sustainable city. It would be Bellevue's loss to shun Sound Transit. They will lose a chance to bring more people to their small town. However wider their roads will be can never bring the capacity a mass transit system can bring to a region...and as ST's light rail system grows on the west side, extending to the already populated Capitol Hill and UDist, more and more people will live in this corridor.

February 16th, 2010, 11:28 AM	#86
alexjonlin Registered User Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 2,248 Likes (Received): 82	The thing is, if it is built at the freeway, development will only grow around one side of it, as the freeway creates a huge barrier, even if there are nice, safe pedestrian bridges over it and everything.

February 16th, 2010, 09:46 PM	#87
RMacherat Buy used books Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 1,699 Likes (Received): 80	I don't think it will be that long before we can wean the eastsiders from their cars For instance, think of the possibilities for use of the space taken up by garages in this home.

February 16th, 2010, 10:34 PM	#88
meku Registered User Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Seattle Posts: 979 Likes (Received): 15	Auto Workshop ! Oh, wait...

February 16th, 2010, 11:09 PM	#89
mhays Journeyman Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Seattle Posts: 8,351 Likes (Received): 116	Don't worry about the Eastside too much. They're developing a variety of dense mixed-use nodes. Not just Downtown Bellevue but Downtown Mercer Island (today), Downtown Redmond (today), and the Bel-Red Corridor (in the next boom). Given the pace of infill so far, it's easy to imagine a good critical mass at each of these locations before rail shows up in the early 20s. The SFR residents will be a part of the rail ridership, but they don't need to be the core part. Second, a sizeable part of the ridership for East Link will be people commuting from Seattle to jobs on the Eastside. By US suburban standards, our region's office jobs are admirably concentrated, many within walking distance of the planned East Link stations.

February 19th, 2010, 09:48 PM	#96
HAWC1506 Registered User Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Bellevue, WA Posts: 1,269 Likes (Received): 15	It was actually quite amusing to hear the way they gave the presentation. It almost seemed like: "C14E provides significant savings...however [insert all disadvantages here]." You can hear them trying to be neutral in the presentation, yet they still end up bashing C14E, whether intentionally or unintentionally. Guess there's no other choice when the comparison numbers are right in front of you. Wish I recorded it.

February 20th, 2010, 11:48 PM	#100
Seasun Registered User Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Seattle Posts: 2,552 Likes (Received): 42	Light rail and transit in general should never be expected to reduce congestion - pisses me off when politicians and media imply otherwise - but it also shouldn't make traffic worse (including traffic like buses). Transit increases the capacity to move people and provides a great travel option for some people. Putting rail on Bellevue streets is a joke (or any city's streets) unless it's called a streetcar or trolley.