4 ms·

In Seattle non-single occupancy vehicle transportation is encouraged by the government. The bus system is good (relative to the United States as a whole). The c

In Seattle non-single occupancy vehicle transportation is encouraged by the government. The bus system is good (relative to the United States as a whole). The city controls sprawl by refusing to extend I think water or sewer outside a line drawn in the 90s. Even with this official backing, they have maxed out the proportion of alternative commuters at 50%. This is similar to Stanford University's experience of alternative commuters reaching a maximum of 50%.

TulliusCicero 4y ago
It is in no way "maxed out". Seattle has better non-car options than average for the US, but it still has a looooong way to go before one could say that the transit or biking options are good; they're still quite bad on average. Only one subway line, a handful of bus-only lanes, and a handful of protected bike lanes, maybe one or two protected intersections? Seattle has a lot of passable design, but very little that's good.
mjmahone17 4y ago
Seattle has mediocre transit. The buses are fine, but they’re inherently limited in how fast their average speeds can be. Seattle could greatly increase transit usage by: - expanding the subway/light rail network. - provide more than two commuter rail lines (right now you can only commute by rail North-South, from Lakewood to Everett). - run more than 4 daily trains to/from Everett (at least one per hour for 16 hours is needed for consistent commutes). - electrify the Sounder corridor to improve acceleration. I suspect the tracks are shared with freight, in which case create dedicated electrified passenger tracks so you can have smaller trains that run more often and at higher speeds. - through run trains so they don’t have to dwell at a Seattle terminus (which means you could run all 16 of the daily Lakewood trains to Everett as well). - add 2-4 more Seattle city stops so people getting off the train are closer to where they need to be (this should be done in combination with through running the trains, so the sum of the dwell times at all 5 Seattle stations is no more than the total dwell time at the terminus now).

TulliusCicero 4y ago

It is in no way "maxed out". Seattle has better non-car options than average for the US, but it still has a looooong way to go before one could say that the transit or biking options are good; they're still quite bad on average. Only one subway line, a handful of bus-only lanes, and a handful of protected bike lanes, maybe one or two protected intersections? Seattle has a lot of passable design, but very little that's good.

mjmahone17 4y ago

Seattle has mediocre transit. The buses are fine, but they’re inherently limited in how fast their average speeds can be. Seattle could greatly increase transit usage by: - expanding the subway/light rail network. - provide more than two commuter rail lines (right now you can only commute by rail North-South, from Lakewood to Everett). - run more than 4 daily trains to/from Everett (at least one per hour for 16 hours is needed for consistent commutes). - electrify the Sounder corridor to improve acceleration. I suspect the tracks are shared with freight, in which case create dedicated electrified passenger tracks so you can have smaller trains that run more often and at higher speeds. - through run trains so they don’t have to dwell at a Seattle terminus (which means you could run all 16 of the daily Lakewood trains to Everett as well). - add 2-4 more Seattle city stops so people getting off the train are closer to where they need to be (this should be done in combination with through running the trains, so the sum of the dwell times at all 5 Seattle stations is no more than the total dwell time at the terminus now).