It looks like the costs went up again for this thing...the Light rail
was voted upon at about $ 14,000 per foot and by the numbers given here
it's up to almost $ 19,000 per foot.

The problem for this project is that every neighborhood and special
interest lobbied to get the route through their neighborhood with
glorious castles of train stations. What could have been a fairly cheap
project generally using existing railbeds and less expensive routes has
turned into a "glory" monument for every little neighborhood boss.

Of course the real problem is that the transportation plan is not about
getting people "around" the area, it's about getting people into and out
of downtown. Basically, the rail becomes a subsidy of sorts to the
downtown core in order to increase business density. I personally
support a better distribution of job location rather than just moving
people in and out of downtown.

Just as a proposal here....for the amount of people (percent) that
something like this rail would carry, wouldn't it be better to invest in
telecommuting solutions for those who would be able to work as such? It
would be a LOT cheaper to work with business to encourage them to work
out ways for (appropriate) employees to telecommute rather than pay
through the nose to move them in and out of downtown areas. In Seattle,
there are HUGE numbers of people doing things like graphic design,
programming, data entry, etc for which most days are spent locked in an
office at a terminal anyway. Although most of us don't work in the
center of a city, as an example, how much of the programming and design
could you actually do at home rather than sitting at a desk in your
office? 10%? that would be 10% less traffic in one swoop which has a
far greater impact than the 1/2% this rail is slated to carry.

Budget for solutions to keep people from needing to commute daily is
essentially zero.

Koz

PrecisionMachinisT wrote:

"Steve........................................... " wrote
in message news97Xb.171110$U%5.801034@attbi_s03...


Here in the Seattle area, we are getting mass transit
at $100,000,000 per mile.
It will carry 1/2 of one percent of the traffic.
It has been calculated that if it is always full of people going to
work, it would still be cheaper to send them pay checks, forever, than
to build the mass transit.


It took but seconds of research to discover gasp that
"conservatives" and Sunday Fundies have huge problems with
actual numbers. Is this a learned trait or one that just evolved?
The result of generations of "home schooling" and genetic
effects?


Cliff, you are a moron. Clark's statement was an accurate reflection of


the


truth regarding the proposed light rail project in Seattle. Your "answer"
could have just as well have come out your ass.

The problem with the project referenced is not that it's publicly funded,
but rather that it's a colossal waste of money, does not solve the problem
addressed, does not go where people want to go, and instead is designed to
line the pockets of rich construction interests, big labor interests, big
finance interests, and their purchased politicos. It's billions of dollars
wasted that could have paid for, say, treatment for you to overcome your
profound mental debility.




Despite having the usual opponents and proponents, the light rail project in
Portland has gone over fairly well--the trains are generally near full, and
the line has undergone continual expansion throughout the years.

Lotsa folks bitched about it at first, I venture at least some of those
folks now ride it on a daily basis.

When looking at cost, one should also look at the cost of building new
freeways to serve the same area--while I have no figures, $100,000,000 /
Mile might not be all that unreasonable. While there is no doubt freeways
can carry more people, the sad fact is they often simply do not fit in where
there is the greatest need to transit people between two areas, and the
fixed points between.

While the costly main lines in dense areas must be put in first, later
running of extensions into outlying areas generally is less costly as rail
can often be placed within existing right of ways, timberlands etc.

Where folks can drive a few blocks and park in a secure lot, and you can
buzz them to work from 20 miles away consistantly in a 30 minute uneventfull
trip and without chance traffic jam to a point within a few blocks of their
workplace, at a cost of a few dollars a day, ridership will usually rapidly
increase.

But you still have to start *somewhere*..........

While anyone who has been there recently would likely agree there are
serious transportation issues in the Seattle area, few are able to come up
with viable ideas to remedy them.

What would you suggest be done about the problem instead, and have you taken
your ideas to those that might have a chance at implementing them ?

I personally think we need more bicycle paths, and a surcharge on vehicle
registration if one is employed over say......five miles from their
home--but hey, I live out in the sticks and walk to work when the weather is
nice, so its really not my problem--and so I really feel no compelling need
to work towards solving it........Nor do I feel my tax dollars should be
spent in solving a problem I had no hand in creating and that is in an area
I only visit on an infrequent basis........

Good luck,