Posted by JonSM99 at 10/15/08 8:10 p.m.

Fares weren't charged on the bus line that ran in the same place in Tacoma before the rail line went in. Far more people ride trains than buses, just as Tacoma saw ridership increase by almost 10 times by switching from a free bus to a free train. When Minneapolis opened light rail in 2004, 40% of the riders had never ridden mass transit before. In St. Louis, most light rail riders had not ridden buses before; most of them own a car--if not two cars. Buses don't get people out of their cars; trains do.

And the cost in 2008 dollars is $17.8B, not $22.8B. On average, each dollar we spend on ST2 will bring a $7.70 return on investment. The massive investment to build Washington, DC's Metrorail network created 9 times as much value in real estate alone. It also slashed traffic congestion and air pollution. You get what you pay for, and we can do the same here.

Posted by gettingreal at 10/15/08 8:54 p.m.

[And the cost in 2008 dollars is $17.8B, not $22.8B.]

Not true. The new tax (along with most of the existing tax) pay only half cost. They haven't included the debt service on that in the $17.8 billion.

I-405 takes 900,000 people per day. The new train in addition to the UW to Seatac train only will take 250,000. We could add 2 lanes to 405 for half the cost of the train.

I-405, 30 miles, 4 lanes, $11 billion, 900,000 people

SR-520, 160,000 people per day

Posted by BenSchiendelman at 10/15/08 9:13 p.m.

gettingreal - $17.9 billion (or $17.8 billion, depending on how much you've read) includes debt service through 2023. Even that isn't meaningful - we don't know what inflation will be like.

Your numbers are very misleading on 405. The total cost of the 405 project is $11 billion. That's just capital costs - and it's in 2002 dollars, not 2007 dollars, so you have five years of inflation missing.

The total capital cost of the light rail? $11.8 billion in 2007 dollars. That's less than 405.

The 405 expansion project would add only 110,000 trips per day for $11 billion in 2002 dollars.
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Projects/I405/corridor/faq.htm

Just in 2030, light rail will serve 280,000 trips per day - with over 150,000 of those trips being dependent on ST2 light rail. That's more cost effective than 405 - and it's a conservative estimate, based on the same federal models that get beat by 20-40% around the country. The reality here is that light rail is close to twice as cost effective as building more highways.

Posted by Apostle at 10/15/08 9:32 p.m.

Portland built 44 miles of light rail for only $1.5 billion, mostly paid for by the federal government.

And Sound Transit wants to build 34 miles of light rail here for about $11.7 billion (not including interest on the bonds) almost completely paid for with a local 0.5% sales tax that will last indefinitely.

Hmmm. Portland got light rail for an average of about $34 million per mile, and ST wants us to raise local sales tax to build 34 miles of light rail for about $345 million per mile.

So Sound Transit wants taxpayers to pay about ten times as much per mile for light rail as it cost in Portland.

What an amazing waste of money.

Posted by gettingreal at 10/15/08 9:34 p.m.

Read your mailer. All But $1.445 billion of the $17.8 billion goes to light rail. There's $6.522 billion in bonds left over in 2023.

[The 405 expansion project would add only 110,000 trips per day for $11 billion in 2002 dollars.]

It's not 110,000 daily trips, you're making that up. 4 lanes of 520 take 160,000 daily, and it's not full most of the time. 405 is 30 miles long, no-one takes a trip from one end to the other. They always measure a trip as someone getting on then getting off. They would be adding closer to 900,000 new "trips", but in reality they would be lengthening the trips people take now. Normally people get off 405 and drive parallel to it to avoid the gridlock. Some through trips would take 405 instead of I-5.

Public transit "trips" average 5 miles, so the 50 mile train is only taking
250,000 * (5 / 50)
= 25,000 across any given point.

4 lane 520 takes 160,000 accross the lake.
160,000 * 30 / 5 = 960,000.
That's how they get 900,000 on 405 now, but obviously they don't calculate it, they measure it.

They don't say how the $11 billion is calculated, but $330 milllion per mile would be a lot for building freeway lanes.

Posted by Apostle at 10/15/08 9:38 p.m.

Finally, we hear from Sound Transit what they predict the operating cost of light rail will be: $1.24 per passenger mile. Metro buses cost around 80 cents per passenger mile to operate, I believe.

Anyone want to check that? Will ST light rail really cost about 50% more per passenger mile to operate than Metro buses? I thought light rail was supposed to cost less to operate than buses.

Posted by gettingreal at 10/15/08 9:46 p.m.

king county operating stats 2007

75 cents per passenger mile for KC metro buses.

Posted by Apostle at 10/15/08 10:07 p.m.

GettingReal: could you check that link to KC metro bus operating costs? That link does not work for me. I would like to have that website for future reference.

Thanks.

If 75 cents per passenger mile is correct, then ST light rail will have an operating cost about 67% higher than Metro buses! Wow. Such a deal.

Posted by you bet at 10/15/08 10:09 p.m.

From the national transit data base, operating cost per trip in the Puget Sound Region--

bus: $5.34
rail: $1.60

Posted by gettingreal at 10/15/08 10:15 p.m.

master link nationwide, see region 10
http://www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/links.htm

KC 2007
http://www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/pubs/profiles/2007/agency_profiles/0001.pdf

Posted by gettingreal at 10/15/08 10:20 p.m.

It used to be .com, now it's .gov
king county operating stats 2006

king county operating stats 2007

New York heavy rail
passenger miles per year 9,646,775,185

Chicago Transit Authority
passenger miles per year 1,115,899,148

Posted by gettingreal at 10/15/08 10:25 p.m.

[bus: $5.34
rail: $1.60]

This is just lying

Posted by Apostle at 10/15/08 10:26 p.m.

ST says that each year of delay adds $500 million to $600 million to the cost. Since the current cost would be about $11.8 billion for the light rail, that would be a cost increase of about 4.2% to 5.3% per year.

But ST's revenue projections predict that the revenue from the 0.5% sales tax for Prop 1 will increase by about 5% per year. So if the cost goes up less than 5% per year, but the tax revenues go up by 5% per year, ST's revenues should increase at a rate as least as fast as the construction cost would increase.

Therefore, no matter how long they wait to build more light rail, they should still be able to build the same amount of light rail for the same 0.5% sales tax that they could build today. They might even be able to build more light rail for 0.5% of the sales tax 10 years from now than they could right now. It just depends on which increases faster -- the construction cost, or the revenue from the 0.5% sales tax.

Posted by BenSchiendelman at 10/16/08 8:21 a.m.

You guys are in your own little dream world. I like how you just ignored the numbers I gave you.

Light rail is $11.8 billion of ST2, in capital costs.

Scroll down in the sidebar to 'estimated costs':
http://future.soundtransit.org/details.aspx

You have all sorts of numbers wrong. Just for another - Metro's trips average about 5 miles. Sound Transit's trips average about 15 miles - they serve a completely different set of users. So cut your per mile costs in a third for ST...

Posted by diehardTRANSITadvocate at 10/18/08 12:47 p.m.

Here is something interesting on Light Rail fitting in with Urban Areas in different parts of the world.

citytransport.info/Trams01.htm

Yes, that is right in the article, Calgary, Alberta does have Light Rail, and the same provincial Progressive Conservative Party(some of the provincial Conservative parties still go by the pre-1993 breakup of the Federal Conservatives name) that was in power then, is still running Alberta with a strong minority today. I am not sure how they fund it, probably through Property Taxes and Oil Taxes, since Alberta does not have local or provincial sales taxes. So that means, since some of the oil refined in the Northern US might be coming from Canada, chances are we might be paying for this and not even know it.

If it fails, ST should not come back in 2009 with a third try, but wait 2 years and study how other cities in the U.S. do it with Light Rail, some do it better, some do it worse, as well as Europe. Such as the TramTrain concept in Karlsruhe, Germany(by the way, at 280,000, smaller than Seattle), it literally saved some branch lines that DB was considering pulling up.(In Europe, they do close rail lines too). This model is being studied all over Europe, already at least two other cities in Germany have adopted it, Saarbrucken and Kassel, and there is one similar system in Holland, even shares some right of way with mainline services, but for a different purpose, staying on high ground. In the U.S, this model is prohibited by the FRA and FTA.

www.karlsruher-modell.de/en/history/hist
ory01.html

Also, WMATA was mentioned, they took about 40 years to reach full build-out on 103 miles of Heavy Rail. Much of it in a tunnel for varrying reasons, including the areas around the Capitol, although the Red Line emerges from one of the tunnels just outside of Union Station, just blocks from the U.S. Capitol. One of the lines crosses a river through a tunnel, another crosses via a bridge. DC Metro ridership? About 400,000 on the bus, 800,000 on the rail, and those riders come from all walks of life, including people who work at the Pentagon, and not just civilian employees. (I know, I saw it while I was there)

Besides Hydro power, we also have Wind Farms coming on line, and the Columbia Generating Station at Hanford.

Posted by unregistered user at 10/19/08 9:42 a.m.

I live in Portland. Do you people have any clue how much better trains are, as a commuting experience, compared to buses? I would gladly pay an extra 50% for that improvement.

After reading about the Alaskan Way viaduct problems...what is wrong with you people? Other places solve these basic collective action problems. Why can't you?

Posted by awott at 10/19/08 9:46 p.m.

"After reading about the Alaskan Way viaduct problems...what is wrong with you people? Other places solve these basic collective action problems. Why can't you?"

Because Seattle has "process" while Portland has socialism.

Posted by Soccer.Guy at 10/22/08 8:36 p.m.

How about "Because Seattle has 'process' while Portland has its act together."

Posted by Kurosawa at 10/22/08 8:52 p.m.

"Just in 2030, light rail will serve 280,000 trips per day - with over 150,000 of those trips being dependent on ST2 light rail. That's more cost effective than 405 - and it's a conservative estimate, based on the same federal models that get beat by 20-40% around the country. The reality here is that light rail is close to twice as cost effective as building more highways."

The cost of building the transit systems to enable being able to do with one car less can save you thousands of dollars a year - the cost in taxes to build such a system pales in comparison to those potential savings.