Category Archives: seattle stuff

Not that kind of transportation

My parents recently moved to a condo on Harbor Ave., the main drag between the West Seattle Bridge and Alki beach. Despite the fact that two buses–the 37 and the 53–stop mere steps from their door, it is nearly impossible for me to visit them.

Of the two routes, only the 37 goes downtown. Unfortunately, it runs to downtown only in the morning, from downtown only in the evening, and only eight times a day each way (twice a day each way on Saturday). The 53 goes to the Alaska Junction, which is a transfer point to buses that go downtown, but it does not run at all on the weekend and runs once an hour–between 8 AM and 4 PM–on weekdays.

Every time I have bused to my parents’ new place, I have been forced to take the 55 to the Admiral District at the north end of West Seattle. This gets me close enough to walk or meet them somewhere. Yesterday, when the 55 I was riding was stopped at the intersection of California and Admiral, a city worker on a Segway scooted past my window on his way to check the gas meter.

While I am sure that (expensive) personal transportation devices help city employees work more efficiently, I find it impossible to believe that more efficient gas-meter-checking can rival the impact of, say, improved bus service in commonly visited areas of town (it’s the beach, for heaven’s sake). Perhaps we can start directing some of those “discretionary” tax dollars toward Metro.

Taking the “community” out of community meeting

As promised, my trip report from tonight’s public meeting:

Let me start by saying that, though I would like to see the city reexamine its focus on a car-centric infrastructure, I certainly understand the need to maintain (and even upgrade) our roads and bridges. This is not a public transit nut’s rant about the amount of money spent on roads. This is an ordinary (well, not exactly ordinary) citizen’s rant about being blatantly manipulated by the people she has entrusted to run her city.

A couple of weeks ago, I received a flyer from SDOT in the mail. The front of the flyer said, “Transportation Priorities Open House” and had several pictures: people walking, people biking, people driving, people waiting at bus stops, buses stopping at bus stops, etc. The back of the card said, “Mayor Greg Nickels, Councilmember Jan Drago, and the Seattle Department of Transportation are hosting a town hall meeting in your community. We want to hear from you. Attend this meeting to share your transportation priorities and help us improve our aging transportation infrastructure.”

Of course I was down.

Part of it was my fault. I assumed that a meeting about transportation priorities would include everything that fell under the transportation umbrella. It did not immediately occur to me (and it probably should have), that there is a difference between Seattle’s transportation priorities and the Seattle Department of Transportation‘s priorities. (SDOT only handles maintenance of roads, bridges, sidewalks, and bike paths.) Still, even after figuring this out (mind, only because I took the time to read the information on the Internet), I still wanted to go. Buses use the roads, too, and besides, I wanted to hear what my neighbors thought about the issue.

Folks, I could’ve had a V8.

First, let’s talk about the survey. I tried to fill it out online last night (after I had foolishly encouraged you to) and found myself unable. The questions were leading and worded in a way that could be used to support almost any agenda. Here’s an example:

How would you rank the value of a good transportation infrastructure/network to your day-to-day life?

Very important Somewhat Not important

I would rank a good transportation infrastructure as crucially important, but that doesn’t mean I think we should build more roads and highways. There was no way to indicate this in the survey.

Here’s another:

Were you aware the City of Seattle has lost critical funding sources (totaling over $20 million dollars per year) that were dedicated to transportation?

Hey! I thought this survey was about me telling them stuff.

On to the meeting. Here’s what I gave up my evening to do:

1. Arrive. Sign in. Pick up a slick brochure with the mayor’s face on it.
2. Find my house on a map of the city and put colored pushpin there.
3. Fill out a paper version of the same lame “survey” that’s on the Web.
4. Look at some displays with pictures of the dire condition of our roads and bridges while waiting for the mayor to arrive.
5. Eat cookies and drink coffee while waiting for the mayor to arrive.
6. Sit down. Listen to: a near-endorsement of the property tax levy the mayor has apparently proposed to fund our transportation “priorities” by the evening’s moderator, a gushing introduction of the mayor by said moderator, a speech by the mayor, and a testimonial about the importance of transportation funding by a Greenwood resident.
7. Watch a PowerPoint presentation by an SDOT rep, complete with scary pictures of deteriorating streets and ummarked crosswalks.
8. Sit in openmouthed silence while the moderator adjourns the meeting and politely invites audience members to stay after and “ask questions of” any of the nice SDOT reps stationed around the room.

The end. There was no public discussion, unless you count this:

Citizen who took time out of his life to attend the meeting: “I’m very confused about this meeting. I was given the impression that this was you coming to the Central District and asking the Central District, ‘What neighborhood priorities do you have from SDOT?’ Instead what this seems to be is a way to say, ‘Oh gosh we’ve got a huge problem here. We need to kind of build up public support by showing all these deteriorating crosswalks and sidewalks and everything, so we can have a funding increase.’ I don’t understand. I got the impression we were going to say, ‘Well, we need to have a street repaired here,’ and that sort of thing. And that’s not what this meeting is about at all.”

Moderator: “The purpose of the meeting was to come and show you the problem as they see it–both the mayor and the Department of Transportation–and to have you and ask questions of city staff, and to put your funding priorities on those green and yellow sheets. We hope you will let your views be known on all of that–both the levy and the funding priorities.

Citizen who took time out of his life to attend the meeting: So there’s no community discussion of priorities, then?

Moderator: “Not as such right now, sir.”

Sound off

If you have an opinion about Seattle’s transportation priorities (Is it possible that you don’t?), you are invited to attend any of a series of public discussions — hosted by the mayor, Councilmember Jan Drago, and the Seattle Department of Transportation–on the subject.

It appears that the discussions are going to focus on which highways to repair and upgrade, but I intend to attend the meeting at Garfield Community Center (tomorrow at 6:30) and raise my voice in support of a strong public transportation infrastructure. I hope to see some of you there.

If you don’t have time to attend one of the meetings, you can come back here for my report about the Garfield meeting. Also, make sure you take this survey.

From bars to bus shelters

After a legal review of Initiative 901, the county health department has concluded that it is against the law to smoke within 25 feet of a bus shelter.

Bus stops have always been popular places to light up, but I noticed an immediate, marked increase in the numbers of smokers at my stops as soon as 901 went into effect. Folks were smoking as many cigarettes as they could suck down before their buses arrived, and even non-bus riding smokers, cast unceremoniously out of their usual haunts, were showing up. There was (and continues to be) a defiant tone to bus-stop smoking, as if to say “You’ve kicked us out of everywhere, but you can’t kick us off the street!”

Apparently, they can.

OK, not exactly. Only bus shelters are affected, not regular bus stops–unless, of course, the regular bus stops are within 25 feet of a building entrance.

I can’t say I’m mad about the ban (bus exhaust provides enough toxic fumes for me, thanks), but it will be interesting to see how it’s enforced. Will the transit police monitor all 1750 bus shelters in the county? Will the SPD spend their time writing warnings and tickets? It hardly seems likely, given the department’s stand on marijuana, and the number of people who smoke that at bus stops.

But that’s a different post altogether.

And speaking of school…

It looks like Ballard and Franklin students will be riding Metro to school, starting in the fall. Metro’s official position is positive, but it looks like some bus drivers have misgivings. From the March 3rd PI article:

“Marc Auerbach, a 10-year Metro Transit operator and former Seattle school bus driver, urged the board not to meet just with Metro executives but to sit down with drivers as well. He noted that Metro drivers aren’t able to deal with discipline problems or other potential emergencies.”

They aren’t the only ones. Though I am positive about the idea in theory, I have ridden the bus with high school kids enough to know I’m not going to like it. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to be one of those grown folks who hates on teenagers. Shoot, when I was a teenager, I rode Metro to school–and most likely cut up and made too much noise, like the kids I ride with now. OK, so maybe I am one of those old folks hatin’ on teenagers (sorry, guys), but my own potential (and minor) irritation is certainly not what’s at issue.

I hope that the district considered all the costs associated with this change when calculating the projected savings. It’s not just about buying bus passes for the kids. There will be the added service on the most frequently used routes (unless they’re assuming that the county is going to cover it), possible schedule changes to accomodate staggered arrival, and, of course, discipline. (Metro plans to ask for staff from the district and the two schools to work with its transit police and operations personnel.)

It will be interesting to see how everything goes. I hope they can work the kinks out with the pilot and find a way to make it successful. It would be nice to see the district save money and take advantage of its existing (and quite good) bus service.

What do you think? Anyone out ride on one of the affected routes (I’m guessing the 15, 28, 7, and 48)? Any high school kids who will be part of the program?