Comments on: Seattle mayor leading by example http://kclightrail.com/2007/12/06/seattle-mayor-leading-by-example/ Your source for news and information on Kansas City's light rail progress Mon, 23 Aug 2010 19:14:01 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Dave http://kclightrail.com/2007/12/06/seattle-mayor-leading-by-example/comment-page-1/#comment-5331 Dave Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:47:30 +0000 http://kclightrail.com/2007/12/06/seattle-mayor-leading-by-example/#comment-5331 i obviously disagree, too. we have at least a 5-10 year wait until light rail service begins anywhere in the metro. unless urban congestion (unlikely) or gas prices jump suddenly (versus rising over time) in that time, i don't see transit use rising dramatically unless we adress the "low-hanging fruit" that keep people away from buses. i obviously disagree, too. we have at least a 5-10 year wait until light rail service begins anywhere in the metro. unless urban congestion (unlikely) or gas prices jump suddenly (versus rising over time) in that time, i don’t see transit use rising dramatically unless we adress the “low-hanging fruit” that keep people away from buses.

]]> By: enough http://kclightrail.com/2007/12/06/seattle-mayor-leading-by-example/comment-page-1/#comment-5310 enough Fri, 07 Dec 2007 05:14:07 +0000 http://kclightrail.com/2007/12/06/seattle-mayor-leading-by-example/#comment-5310 ^ oooooohhh -- i disagree. whatever we get in the future, we'll always have a bus system to supplement / feed it. there are lots of ways to improve the current system -- more than i want to enumerate here. we don't have to wait until 2015 or so for major improvement in transit -- 2013 is the currently anticipated start-construction date for light rail. my concern is that the ata is putting so much of its effort into studying light rail now that they aren't getting around to improvements they know are needed in the bus system. as for max buses not getting priority, that's the fault of the traffic engineers, not of the previous administration. get the traffic engineers to ease up on their "traffic uber alles" attitude and they can give max real priority. (currently, i think max only gets priority if it's running two or more minutes late, and if the particular intersection hasn't given priority to any other max bus in the past seven minutes.) and as for free transit for city employees, why not? even if they can't get a single-seat ride to city hall, they can drive to a park-and-ride lot. transit leadership is, indeed, about more than just light rail. ^ oooooohhh — i disagree. whatever we get in the future, we’ll always have a bus system to supplement / feed it. there are lots of ways to improve the current system — more than i want to enumerate here. we don’t have to wait until 2015 or so for major improvement in transit — 2013 is the currently anticipated start-construction date for light rail. my concern is that the ata is putting so much of its effort into studying light rail now that they aren’t getting around to improvements they know are needed in the bus system.

as for max buses not getting priority, that’s the fault of the traffic engineers, not of the previous administration. get the traffic engineers to ease up on their “traffic uber alles” attitude and they can give max real priority. (currently, i think max only gets priority if it’s running two or more minutes late, and if the particular intersection hasn’t given priority to any other max bus in the past seven minutes.)

and as for free transit for city employees, why not? even if they can’t get a single-seat ride to city hall, they can drive to a park-and-ride lot.

transit leadership is, indeed, about more than just light rail.

]]> By: matt http://kclightrail.com/2007/12/06/seattle-mayor-leading-by-example/comment-page-1/#comment-5302 matt Thu, 06 Dec 2007 23:00:50 +0000 http://kclightrail.com/2007/12/06/seattle-mayor-leading-by-example/#comment-5302 while i agree that transit leadership should be comprehensive, i disagree that, at this point, "we" should put a tremendous amount of effort into improving what we already have. i would prefer that energy go towards expediting a potentially superior system that presents the opportunity to create real urban density. transit can do a good deal more for a healthy society than simply moving people. while i agree that transit leadership should be comprehensive, i disagree that, at this point, “we” should put a tremendous amount of effort into improving what we already have. i would prefer that energy go towards expediting a potentially superior system that presents the opportunity to create real urban density. transit can do a good deal more for a healthy society than simply moving people.

]]>