Category Archives: seattle stuff

Sonics lost, but Seattle won

Tonight, in keeping with our annual tradition, Bus Nerd and I attended the Pistons/Sonics game. My team lost (Pistons: 101, Seattle: 97), but since the Pistons are my second-favorite team (and Tayshaun Prince is my favorite player), I wasn’t too disappointed. Aside from a return ride on one of the funkiest of funky buses (both of us smelled skunk), fun times were had by all.

We returned home to this fabulous news:

“No and no: Voters rejecting both viaduct options”

“Mass transit may end up as biggest winner”

Transit + Streets is still alive, baby! Now, let’s see how much clout this “advisory vote” actually has.

Viaduct day

Thanks to Adam Hyla and Tim Harris (my boys over at Real Change) for this very real editorial about today’s viaduct vote:

If we continue to act as though our car-dependent present is the only imaginable future, progress toward an environmentally sustainable future will come too little, too late. Adopting a Transit + Streets solution begins the process of meeting the 2012 Kyoto Protocol goal of cutting emissions back to 1990 levels, the equivalent of getting 130,000 cars off the road.

We are amazed that tunnel proponents and viaduct rebuild advocates who all claim to be looking out for future generations don’t see the writing on the wall. Our days of auto-dependence are numbered.

Yep.

If we keep using the (unacceptable) status quo as an excuse to perpetuate our car-centric infrastructure (everyone drives, therefore we must continue to accommodate driving as the primary mode of transportation), we will never see change. Well, we will, but it won’t be the kind of change most of us are looking for.

Good news for bike nerds

Three-bike racks!

One of Metro's new bike racks

From a Metro press release:

Currently, all Metro buses are equipped with two-bike racks, but that isn’t enough on some routes where bicyclists must wait for an open rack on the next bus. The addition of a three-bike rack has been long awaited by bicyclists, especially those who want to travel across the State Route 520 Bridge where there are no bike lanes. That is why the first of these racks are being installed on buses assigned to routes that travel between Seattle and the Eastside. …

The purchase and installation of the [three-bike] racks is being funded through a $195,000 federal grant, which should cover the cost at the first two bases. More racks will be installed on the rest of the fleet as funding becomes available, plus any new bus purchased in the future will come with a three-bike rack already installed.

Metro has installed the racks on nine buses so far (Bus Nerd’s already seen one), and they’ll be adding about 25 a week for the next 10 weeks.

I’m (still) not much of a biker, but I know a useful improvement when I see one. This is goodness–except maybe for the drivers, who’ll have to maneuver already enormous buses with those big ol’ contraptions on the front. And of course, we still need to find a safe, warm environment for folks to learn how to use ’em…

The good book(s)

My new friend Jeffrey, aka “Bus Man,” the same man who is responsible for Busfather‘s brief but memorable visit to my house, recently gave me these:

A bus chick's page turner
My favorite is the one on the left. Betcha can’t guess why.

Transit operating handbooks, baby! Soon, I will know everything there is to know about Metro routes, rules, and regulations.

Jeffrey, you’ve created a monster.

It is too possible!

I’m a very big fan of software-assisted trip planning. Bus Nerd tends to use schedules, route maps, and his own brain to figure out how to get where he’s going, but I am quick to type in my start and end points and let Trip Planner (these days, via Spotbus) do the work for me. I use it at least once a day–even when I know which buses to take (not a big fan of reading multiple schedules). I absolutely cannot imagine my life without it.

But (gasp!) the mighty Trip Planner has its flaws. Here’s one:

A few days ago, Vlad, a transit type who will soon be moving to Seattle from Philly, e-mailed to ask how to get from 11th and Pike on Capitol Hill to 9800 Willows Rd NE in Redmond. His message implied that he had attempted to find the information himself but had been unsuccessful. Always up for a good bus challenge, I decided to try.

When I entered the addresses in Trip Planner (assuming he’d be traveling during peak hours on a weekday), I received this message:

#20007–Trip not possible
See Trip Planner Messages [link] for additional information and alternatives

To return to the previous page, use your browser’s Back button.

The “Trip Planner Messages” link leads to this:

Trip Planner Tips – Messages

At times, the Trip Planner will return a message instead of the information you requested. This section describes the most common messages and what they mean.

Some of the messages indicate that transit service is not available near a location or at the time you requested. There may still be alternatives that the Trip Planner can’t give you. Read more about those alternatives.

If you receive a message that does not seem correct, you can report it using the ‘Comments’ function at the top or bottom of each Trip Planner page or the ‘Feedback’ link on some pages.

• Dates – too far in the past or in the future [link]
• No query data [link]
• No service at origin (or destination) at the date/time specified [link]
• No stops within walking distance [link]
• No times available [link]
• Start & end locations are too near each other for transit to be of use [link]
• The Trip Planner system is currently being updated [link]
• Trip not possible [link]
• Walking distance exceeds one mile or is not safe [link]

You might remember that the original message for Vlad’s trip was, “Trip not possible”:

Trip not possible

More than one factor has caused the trip planner not to be able to respond. You may get better results by checking your entry for one of the conditions described above and making adjustments as noted, or there may be a suitable alternative to transit. [Hey!] Note: you may get this message when you are using the Schedule portion of the trip planner and not actually planning a trip

What actually fixed the problem was changing the answer to question #4 on the original form–What is the farthest distance you want to walk?–from the default of 1/2-mile to 3/4-mile. The resulting itineraries were far from convenient, but the trip was certainly possible.

A more specific and appropriate message could have made a huge difference here. A couple of stabs:

“The walking distance for this trip is longer than the distance you are willing to walk. Do you want to see the itinerary anyway?”

“The walking distance for this trip is longer than the distance you are willing to walk. Try changing the distance you are willing to walk.”

You get the picture. If those kinds of specific messages are too difficult to implement, how about a more helpful generic message that lists some likely reasons the trip did not work? I’d hate to put folks like Vlad off the bus before they even start riding it.

The new answer to the ultimate question (Hint: It’s not 42)

In Friday’s Seattle Times, our County Kingpin weighed in on the viaduct issue. His take: Any solution, whether it’s a tunnel, a rebuild, or his (and my) preferred surface option, must include transit improvements.

The folks at Metro have identified 49 strategic investments that, if implemented, would reduce car trips on the viaduct by about 35,000 (roughly 30% of current trip levels). Said Sims:

Removing 35,000 trips helps make the “tunnel lite” option viable, which saves more than $1 billion from the original tunnel estimate. Removing 35,000 trips should allow for a smaller rebuild, which should save many hundreds of millions of dollars. And transit that absorbs 35,000 trips is essential to seriously contemplating any surface option.

Yep.

And more:

Therefore, rather than simply wait for the March vote on the viaduct options, we should all work together during the legislative session to take whatever steps are necessary to make these 49 investments a reality.

Yes, please! And to the folks in Olympia: If you get on a roll, don’t feel obligated to stop at 49. I’m good with 59, or 79, or any of the fast-food-value-menu numbers.

(Note to self: Never write a blog entry after reminiscing with an old friend about your broke college days.)

Montlake: a pedestrian’s nightmare

To get home from the Eastside in the evenings, I usually take the 545 to Montlake and then transfer to the 48. I say “usually” because sometimes I ride the 545 all the way downtown to transfer just to avoid the tedious and time-consuming trip from the bus stop on 520 (where I get off the 545) to the bus stop on Montlake Blvd. (where I catch the 48).

I am OK with walking all the way up a long hill from the freeway stop to Montlake and then down the block to the corner of Montlake & E. Lake Washington (see black line below), but what’s with the crosswalk situation? There is no crosswalk directly across the street to the southbound bus stop (green line), so I have to either:

• Cross three times–and wait for three separate lights (orange line), OR
• Walk down a few flights of stairs to the eastbound side of the 520 (see label), walk a block or so west, and then walk up a couple more flights of stairs to the west side of Montlake.

Neither option works well when one is in a hurry to catch the bus, and missing a forty-late can mean a 30-minute wait on an isolated island surrounded by cars. No likey.

Three lights to cross one street: no likey

(Click the picture for a larger view.)

I was hoping that Greg Nickels would add this insane intersection to his list of streets that need improvements, but I think it will probably be left alone until we figure out what we’re going to do with 520. On the plus side: Stair climbing is good for your glutes.