5 ms·

Seattle delivered rail infrastructure on time and under budget, and now it has a ridership in the millions. People want trains. People use trains. Build more go

Seattle delivered rail infrastructure on time and under budget, and now it has a ridership in the millions. People want trains. People use trains. Build more goddamn trains.

sfpotter 4y ago
It did? I’m from Seattle, and the plans for a light rail were perennially stalled since I was a kid. What they’ve built so far is nice, but they’re expanding it at a glacial pace. They could build more and faster.
- AmpsterMan 4y ago
  Point still stands though, as meager as it is. The link is the only major public works project in recent memory that largely succeeded AND under budget
- resist_futility 4y ago
  1-2+ million a month. I wonder how fast light rail will be when they have as many stops as are planned, will it be just as slow as a bus? https://www.soundtransit.org/ride-with-us/system-performance-tracker/ridership https://www.soundtransit.org/ride-with-us/system-performance... https://www.soundtransit.org/get-to-know-us/maps https://www.soundtransit.org/get-to-know-us/maps
  - socialismisok 4y ago
    They aren't adding new stops in between existing stops. Trains board and deboard WAY faster than busses. And the link has grade separated track most of the way. So it cannot be slowed by traffic. There's no reason to think it would be slower than it is today, which is to say, often faster than a single occupancy vehicle.
- socialismisok 4y ago
  Yep, we talked about it for a long time, but it did in fact complete on time and under budget. It's expanding slowly because there's a lot of pushback to adding more, which is a bummer. We need like 8x the amount of rail here, at least.
  - sfpotter 4y ago
    Could you provide a source clarifying this? I’m not sure where I’d look this information up.
    - quantumwannabe 4y ago
      They’re wrong. The project was delayed several years and was several billion over budget. >The Central Link project was originally planned to open in 2006 and projected to cost $1.9 billion (equivalent to $2.95 billion in 2020 dollars), but the estimates were found to be unrealistic by auditors in November 2000. New executives, hired by Sound Transit to replace previous program directors, presented a revised plan with an opening date pushed back three years to 2009, costing $3.8 billion (equivalent to $5.53 billion in 2020 dollars). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_1_(Sound_Transit)#Budget_issues_and_delays https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_1_(Sound_Transit)#Budget_...
      - socialismisok 4y ago
        From your link, the project completed 117 million under budget. Yes, the initial planners made bad estimates before anyone started working, they were fired and new planners were brought in. Those second planners then properly scooped the initial project and the Ulink extension, both of which were under budget. So no, definitely not wrong.
        quantumwannabe 4y ago
        The money spent was more than what the voters approved. Making a new estimate that is much higher and spending less than that isn't coming in "under budget".
        socialismisok 4y ago
        Voters approved a $3.91B tax to cover the light rail, minor improvements to bus onramps, and some commuter rail improvements. The initial light rail was given an estimate of 1.8B of that 3.9B that voters approved, and year of expenditure costs were roughly 20% higher then that, but federal studies by the dept of transportation have evaluated the costs and believe that there was a period of unpredictable and unusual inflation. If you control for that, the project would have completed under it's original budget. Additionally, they did come under their revised budget and the Ulink extension has come in under budget too. I guess I don't fault a transit authority for making a 10+ plan that makes reasonable assumptions about inflation given the information they have, and then deliver only slightly above budget after being impacted by said inflation.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
jbay808 4y ago
I'll be taking the Shinkansen to Tokyo this week. Watching the bullet trains depart from Tokyo Station every seven and a half minutes on just the Tokaido line alone, carrying around a thousand people each... it's hard not to be a little envious. The productivity gains must be immense, and JR is practically printing money with the ticket revenue alone.
panick21_ 4y ago
I mean maybe for the US its a success. But reality is in Germany/Switzerland metro areas with 1/10 the city have rail networks 10x the size.
- socialismisok 4y ago
  Do you think the first rail built in Germany was a failure because it wasn't 10x the size? We get to a big rail network by building more rail. Seattle went from 0 to 1 rail line, which now has millions of riders per month. We're about to complete our second line, and we've approved funding for more. These things take time.
  - panick21_ 4y ago
    Oh that's totally fine. I understand that its a success for the city. But in terms of an overall transit network its not a success yet. So really there should be 10 follow up network increases already planned and as far as I know they are not really that aggressive.
    - socialismisok 4y ago
      They have two additional lines being constructed or planned at the moment, to bring the rail out to the surrounding population centers, and they are extending the central line significantly. Pretty soon we'll have three large lines, and there's discussions about what to build next. The rail is fairly popular out here.
      - panick21_ 4y ago
        Great to hear.
bigbacaloa 4y ago
Madrid has daily ridership around a million or two. Seattle has monthly ridership in the millions. That's actually still pretty terrible for a city of its size.
- socialismisok 4y ago
  Did Madrid start their rail network within the past decade? Seattle has had rail for single digit years. It's expanding, and ridership is growing. We went from 0 trips a year to tens of millions over the past couple years.
coryrc 4y ago
The light rail doesn't cover most of the population of Seattle, instead a slow train meanders far out into the suburbs. Pretend we all agreed to start taking public transit. We couldn't, even the population today couldn't use the system getting planned out to 2055, let alone account for growth.

Seattle delivered rail infrastructure on time and under budget, and now it has a ridership in the millions. People want trains. People use trains. Build more goddamn trains.

sfpotter 4y ago

It did? I’m from Seattle, and the plans for a light rail were perennially stalled since I was a kid. What they’ve built so far is nice, but they’re expanding it at a glacial pace. They could build more and faster.

AmpsterMan 4y ago
Point still stands though, as meager as it is. The link is the only major public works project in recent memory that largely succeeded AND under budget
resist_futility 4y ago
1-2+ million a month. I wonder how fast light rail will be when they have as many stops as are planned, will it be just as slow as a bus? https://www.soundtransit.org/ride-with-us/system-performance-tracker/ridership https://www.soundtransit.org/ride-with-us/system-performance... https://www.soundtransit.org/get-to-know-us/maps https://www.soundtransit.org/get-to-know-us/maps
- socialismisok 4y ago
  They aren't adding new stops in between existing stops. Trains board and deboard WAY faster than busses. And the link has grade separated track most of the way. So it cannot be slowed by traffic. There's no reason to think it would be slower than it is today, which is to say, often faster than a single occupancy vehicle.
socialismisok 4y ago
Yep, we talked about it for a long time, but it did in fact complete on time and under budget. It's expanding slowly because there's a lot of pushback to adding more, which is a bummer. We need like 8x the amount of rail here, at least.
- sfpotter 4y ago
  Could you provide a source clarifying this? I’m not sure where I’d look this information up.
  - quantumwannabe 4y ago
    They’re wrong. The project was delayed several years and was several billion over budget. >The Central Link project was originally planned to open in 2006 and projected to cost $1.9 billion (equivalent to $2.95 billion in 2020 dollars), but the estimates were found to be unrealistic by auditors in November 2000. New executives, hired by Sound Transit to replace previous program directors, presented a revised plan with an opening date pushed back three years to 2009, costing $3.8 billion (equivalent to $5.53 billion in 2020 dollars). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_1_(Sound_Transit)#Budget_issues_and_delays https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_1_(Sound_Transit)#Budget_...
    - socialismisok 4y ago
      From your link, the project completed 117 million under budget. Yes, the initial planners made bad estimates before anyone started working, they were fired and new planners were brought in. Those second planners then properly scooped the initial project and the Ulink extension, both of which were under budget. So no, definitely not wrong.
      - quantumwannabe 4y ago
        The money spent was more than what the voters approved. Making a new estimate that is much higher and spending less than that isn't coming in "under budget".
        socialismisok 4y ago
        Voters approved a $3.91B tax to cover the light rail, minor improvements to bus onramps, and some commuter rail improvements. The initial light rail was given an estimate of 1.8B of that 3.9B that voters approved, and year of expenditure costs were roughly 20% higher then that, but federal studies by the dept of transportation have evaluated the costs and believe that there was a period of unpredictable and unusual inflation. If you control for that, the project would have completed under it's original budget. Additionally, they did come under their revised budget and the Ulink extension has come in under budget too. I guess I don't fault a transit authority for making a 10+ plan that makes reasonable assumptions about inflation given the information they have, and then deliver only slightly above budget after being impacted by said inflation.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

jbay808 4y ago

I'll be taking the Shinkansen to Tokyo this week. Watching the bullet trains depart from Tokyo Station every seven and a half minutes on just the Tokaido line alone, carrying around a thousand people each... it's hard not to be a little envious. The productivity gains must be immense, and JR is practically printing money with the ticket revenue alone.

panick21_ 4y ago

I mean maybe for the US its a success. But reality is in Germany/Switzerland metro areas with 1/10 the city have rail networks 10x the size.

socialismisok 4y ago
Do you think the first rail built in Germany was a failure because it wasn't 10x the size? We get to a big rail network by building more rail. Seattle went from 0 to 1 rail line, which now has millions of riders per month. We're about to complete our second line, and we've approved funding for more. These things take time.
- panick21_ 4y ago
  Oh that's totally fine. I understand that its a success for the city. But in terms of an overall transit network its not a success yet. So really there should be 10 follow up network increases already planned and as far as I know they are not really that aggressive.
  - socialismisok 4y ago
    They have two additional lines being constructed or planned at the moment, to bring the rail out to the surrounding population centers, and they are extending the central line significantly. Pretty soon we'll have three large lines, and there's discussions about what to build next. The rail is fairly popular out here.
    - panick21_ 4y ago
      Great to hear.

bigbacaloa 4y ago

Madrid has daily ridership around a million or two. Seattle has monthly ridership in the millions. That's actually still pretty terrible for a city of its size.

socialismisok 4y ago
Did Madrid start their rail network within the past decade? Seattle has had rail for single digit years. It's expanding, and ridership is growing. We went from 0 trips a year to tens of millions over the past couple years.

coryrc 4y ago

The light rail doesn't cover most of the population of Seattle, instead a slow train meanders far out into the suburbs. Pretend we all agreed to start taking public transit. We couldn't, even the population today couldn't use the system getting planned out to 2055, let alone account for growth.