Yikes...not a lot of notice on this one...
Tonight - Tuesday September 16th (probably when you're reading this) - the Kirkland City Council is discussing the fate of the Woodinville subdivision as it stands within the city's borders. Nearly 7 miles of track exists within the city lines, including some of the most scenic sections and some of the tightest fits for the tracks running through places like Houghton. Eastside Trail Advocates will be at the meeting, and I'm hoping Rail Advocates like Eastside Rail Now! will be there as well. I can't make it, but I've done my part to raise awareness already.
In 2007 I was invited to speak before the Moss Bay Neighborhood Association, and I had the opportunity to share my vision of a rail line through the city that could easily serve some of the transportation needs of the region. My discussion was well received, and at the very least planted the idea that the rail line was a resource that should be saved.
My message today is the same as it was in 2006 when I heard that the line was up for sale. We need a rail line through the Eastside to serve the transportation needs of the region; without it, we are merely a region that is thinking big rather than taking the tough steps to make "World Class" happen for suburban Seattle. The argument from the Trail Advocate side has often been, "Look at all the grade crossings that will hold up traffic in the area." Yeah, look at them. They were there last year, and they were there 100 years ago. Get over it. It's a right-of-way, and cities like Chicago are littered with them. Last I checked, Chicago and its bustling suburbs were the center of the Midwest Universe - purely World Class. People deal with commuter trains there every day, and have for over a century. A commuter train will take maybe 20 seconds out of someone's day if they get caught at a crossing; if 20 seconds is that important on the wrong side of a train then maybe it's time to switch careers.
I love trails as much as the next person, because I'm also a big Bicycle Advocate. But as our region gets more congested the reality of life shows the vital need for transportation options that impact more people than those who ride bikes to work. I support an option that preserves the rail corridor first, and provides for a trail second.
Hopefully there will be someone at the meeting tonight who feels the same.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Hi Kurt,
ReplyDeleteA few thoughts:
There's a whole lot more traffic than 100 years ago in the area.
The number of people who would use this train in the area is far less than a huge city such as Chicago. The numbers of people do not exist to support the rail line.
It takes a lot more than 29 seconds if you are stopped at an intersection. It can take 4 minutes during the middle of the day. I know because I videoed a time when I was caught by a train crossing up in Totem Lake. If you log onto www.eastsidetrailadvocates.org, you can see the video posted there. It's for real, not rush hour, and it still took 4 minutes.
Yes, you're right that there are more people on the Eastside than there were 100 years ago. But the fact remains...the tracks have been here a lot longer than the people, and WE all chose to live and work around them. And how do we know that there aren't enough passengers to support the line if we don't have the trains in place? Are we considering that the people on the train are probably not from the Eastside, that they might be coming from Snohomish or South KC?
ReplyDeleteI've watched the video, and I think it's misleading to say that a 4 minute wait can be attributed to a three-car train going through the intersection at Totem Lake; what I saw in the video was 10% train and 90% Totem Lake traffic that sucks no matter what time of day and regardless of what's rolling through the branch line. 124th at that spot backs up often, and it's not because of a train. It's because people are either getting on the freeway or driving east towards Avondale. There is tremendous backlog at this crossroads, much like 196th and 44th Avenue in Lynnwood. To say a train causes this, in the words of Ross Schaefer, "It's like saying it rains a lot in Seattle because Les Schwab is offering Free Beef."
I think a more accurate example of the true impact of a passenger train running through a grade crossing can be seen in the video I have blog-posted here:
http://snipurl.com/3uxfa
Estimated time for the Dinner Train to get through the crossing at 30mph? About 40 seconds. And the Dinner Train was longer than any Commuter Train consist would be on this line.
Listen, our transportation is in gridlock. Gasoline prices - while currently stabilized - tends to fluctuate with the whims of whatever is in the news. We have a vital tool at our disposal, one that runs the length of our fastest growing region of the county, and people want that to get pulled out? It just doesn't make sense to me. I think the numbers presented by the anti-rail groups are embellished, and in some cases may be hiding the true nature of NIMBY. The region's traffic and potential for smooth rail commuting is being held hostage by a choice few who may be harboring a fear of property devaluation or imminent change that they didn't prepare for or expect. When it comes to getting around, we all need to think communally because it's not going to get better simply by putting in a rail trail.
I'm hoping that rail service through the Eastside is one of those solutions, for the sake of future generations. Thanks for your comments.
I totally support a dual use purpose for this railroad. In Europe, many towns and suburbs the size of Kirkland and even smaller have several rail-lines connecting it to a major city and it is incredibly fast and efficient. As for the number of people using this train, if you compare similar suburbs in the United States with Kirkland, you'll see that many cities with even less population and density than Kirkland have successful commuter trains. Come down to 164th st or any of the arterials in King/Snohomish COunty and you'll see that it isn't the train that's causing the back-up; the roads are near capacity.
ReplyDelete