Got to ride this yesterday, so cool finally having a station (somewhat) close to my house! I've talked with my friends about it, and even though some of us can drive we all agree it still feels like Seattle just became unlocked for us as a place to go, especially as minors meaning we get to ride for free. It's so liberating.
I've lived here all my life but I was today years old when I learned there's a difference between "Montlake" and "Mountlake". Sometimes it takes someone new to an area who is taking the effort to learn about their new surroundings to teach the locals things they never bothered to learn. Thanks!
Luckily, there is no "Montlake" station. It is called "University of Washington" instead. (Personally, I wish they used the name "Husky Stadium", since it's not really on the main campus of UW, but that's a different story).
@@BritishMetric144 That was my thought. It's even worse when you realize that there's no stations on campus and that most people who are new to the area are far more likely to think of the stadium than the campus. This sort of thing was pretty much inevitable given that there's a University and two streets named University in the city.
One of the cool things about this is that there's a bus from Lynnwood to Alderwood mall, which should help a lot in terms of generating revenue for the area. There's times when I'd like to shop there for something small and wouldn't mind taking a bus and train up there.
As a Texan who moved to Seattle a little over a year ago for work, I have a great deal of respect for what Seattle/Sound Transit have ushered in with Link. Two improvements to the system I would make over time would be: 1) Build station bypass tracks to create express service trains that can serve the region's major hubs and get people to their destination faster. The full build out of the planned light rail will be hilariously long rides for people commuting from Tacoma or Everett into Seattle or Bellevue if express service isn't provided. 2) Build parking structures with robust column grids that can be retrofitted over time to become occupiable real-estate (offices, residences). And, if nothing else, build store-front businesses on the first level of these structures.
I rode it on Saturday. Took it from Lynnwood to Westlake and then took the monorail to the Seattle Center. Its a lot faster and cheaper than driving there and trying to find a parking spot.
ST3 is already pushing people's patience and it is going off the rails in cost. So they probably know asking for more is not going to end well for them...
@@walawala-fo7dsvery true, but a man can hope haha. I do wish the politicians in Olympia would help out more with funding all the transit expansions across the state tho
@@mechayoshi9397they also have to worry about the ferries (the one to Sidney isn’t even running rn, and a few others are still on limited service), Amtrak Cascades (which is done in conjunction with Oregon and BC), and then there’s everyone east of the mountains they have to support as well. And they do that without any state income tax.
ST-4 should be about making the existing system work better. Fix up downtown stations, grade separate everything, increase frequency, later night trains, stuff like that. I think Sound Transit is going to be overwhelmed building the ST-3 lines for a while.
Interesting video - I knew about the University/Symphony name change but didn't know about the station numbering system. Thanks for the detailed rundown!
The first time I saw the station codes on signage, I thought it was trying to indicate bus route connections. Took a second to realize what they were doing after seeing them all listed out.
Thanks for this thorough and positive review! I walked many of those same station areas this weekend. Very suburban as of now, but each area is beginning a transformation.
I think the point Reece Martin is making is that if you are doing something grade-separated you might as well go for heavy rail. The only advantage of light rail is that it _can_ run on the street, whereas it has many downsides.
Which is rather narrow minded as the counter point to his point is that cost of heavy rail metro is also a huge downside. With systems across North America having massive pressure to reduce costs post pandemic patterns, going heavy rail is very risky. Sure you can opt for reducing system size just to have it be heavy rail, but that can hurt transit more than help it. This extension was approved in 2008 and still just barely touched the 3rd most populous county in the state. Heavy Metro would be nicer but how many more decades and billions would that cost when voters wanted something now...and they had to wait almost two decades 😂 We already see Vancouver come to grips with a massive shortfall that is making the news and will mean less expansions, reduced service, and worse performance just because they overbuilt the system for the region. Sound transit might have underbuilt its system but in a day and age we are at where public transit funding remains very divisive and cost overruns grab the headlines as austerity and a recession loom....I have to say sound transit made the right bet for once. Yes, everyone wants the Jurassic Park approach to transit where you spare no expense. Unfortunately that just means a financial disaster that hurts transit long term and casts a shadow on future projects. Seattle is showing how to stretch those light rail dollars cash strapped cities are watching for sure. Yeah it is probably a flawed system and will remain so. But we're actually talking Seattle here taking risks. Remember it's a city that voted down multiple systems in the past and even turned down a subway. The fact the region has built this much is actually surprising.
He complains about it not being grade separated and how trams that are at grade are bad and prone to accidents..., then complains when it is grade separated because trams should not be grade separated. Everyone knows people like that. No matter what, they argue whatever position is contrarian 😂 Funniest facts is the vast majority of people don't care about floor height. They care about one thing: when is the next train arriving. Frequency is king and floor doesn't determine frequency.
@@cmdrls212 Light rail is cheaper... because you don't have to grade separate it... The major costs are the stations and the right of way - the trains themselves are a rounding error.
@@walawala-fo7ds if you can move more people with fewer drivers (which high floor lets you do), then you can run more trains, ergo more frequency. Not sure what's confusing about this. He's arguing for getting the most transit per dollar.
@@cmdrls212the higher costs for heavy rail in Seattle is because they need new yards+maintenance, not because the trains are bigger, and the 1 line is so grade-separated that the guide way and tunnel costs are same as heavy rail. Ik the street-running part was needed for the line to exist in the first place West Seattle link should be light metro for the same reason 2 line on the other hand has level crossings that warrant light rail, and the floating bridge stretch is likely not traversable by normal trains
Something good about all the parking that may be unintuitive is that parking was actually recently removed from Northgate for a transit oriented development, similar to the one planned for Lynnwood City Center. I’m happy more parking is being added up north bc there’s all kinds of commuters from folks up north in, say, Everett, or even Bellingham, that drive down to park and use the system. I’m glad that parking is moving further north to reduce vmt and densify neighborhoods closer in to the city
I’m one of those from Bellingham. As someone who frequently travels to Seattle, I’ll (and have already) use Link every time to avoid having to deal with parking and traffic when going to events and things to do there.
They can only dream of such a wonderful scam: 161 billion for an endless money pit, zero accountability for the constant construction mistakes, all funded by people who don't use it. Just wait till they begin reducing the amount of trains per day, then you're going to have a LOT of fun. It's projected to pay for itself in about 4,000 years according to Sound Transit ridership estimates (not including maintenance and overhead, of course).
I definitely agree about the golf course. There’s plenty of areas in Seattle and the surrounding area that still need up zoning and more housing. I don’t think we need to give up one of the biggest green spaces we have, because once gone, they rarely ever return. I wish the whole thing would be a park though, that much space for a single use activity that most people will never engage in is absurd in a major city, particularly near two light rail stations. Golf has been trending downwards in popularity for a long time now and can present issues with water usage and chemical fertilizers.
about the lack of a station between Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace, there is (apparently) supposed to be a possible space for an infill station not at 220th, but at 212th. Although this station has been deferred for the time being. This was also going to be the case with 130th Street, although high support from local residents and neighborhood councils made the station start construction around 2 years ago. It's interesting how there's no reserved code for this infill station, which might mean that it really isn't planned any time soon or at all, I honestly have no clue.
130th was part of sound transit 3. 220th is not part of anything voter approved so there is nothing to fast track. As per comments about the golf course in130th, this 200 million dollar golf course station expense is constantly challenged as it is within walking distance of shoreline south and slows trains down for basically no gains that aren't already realized in Northgate and shoreline south. But that aside, the lot on 220th is construction staging not station intended. It wouldn't make much sense to slow down an already overburdened system with so many stops in such sparsely populated area. Add too many stops in this suburban area that is considerably far from Seattle, and soon the system becomes inefficient and unable to get up to speed, which it needs to do because you're literally in the next county over to here Seattle is. The existing stations also have tons of room for densification before anything at 220th is needed not to mention 220th is extremely close to Mount Lake Terrace station already, which is where the urban core is for that city as well as Lynnwood City center. 220th is part of mount lake terrace, and there are no plans or need to create a second city center there when the existing space allocated in MLT downtown isn't even being used. I get it that in some circles more stations more good, but that's on smaller systems that don't have to cover such vast distances the way link does. Remember this system needs to go to Everett. If anything I'd argue it already has one or two stops too many that exist only to appease overzealous activists. Yes, I get everyone wants a station because light rail is the new shiny. But if everyone gets one, the system will be so inefficient that it's appeal and ridership will tank as it will spend more time stopping than actually going anywhere. A better approach is to build a second line on sr99 or i405. Space the stations at offsets with link so that you can choose which line to use based on your location and only stop half as frequently.
If forecasts hold yes. That's probably what angers some pundits. Light rail shouldn't be this good at moving this many people. When finished it will be nearly 100 miles long with 4 lines. It will be the one of the biggest light rail systems in the world and certainly biggest in North America. Unfortunately red tape means it will take two more decades to finish 😂
@@walawala-fo7dswould be nice if the feds had some infrastructure financing to allow us to leverage our local tax dollars... build it out now versus over 25 years when costs go up, no sales tax on construction, supplemental federal funds, etc.
Love the extension. Reinforces in my mind that the light rail must go to West Seattle and Ballard. Buses just don’t cut it. As someone that worked for 37 years in way finding, transportation planning & design, and most importantly, operations, the station codes are a dumb idea.
The station codes will be useful for people navigating on their phones, tourists and the like. Especially if they don’t speak English, much easier to match up a number on your phone than a random name in a language (or maybe even alphabet) you don’t understand. Besides, it has no downside other than making the map look slightly messier and a few extra cents of ink.
I like the idea of station codes, but I hate the implementation. Once East Link connects, each overlapping station will have two different stations codes (e.g. 1-50 and 2-50) even though they're the same place.
@@lchap0506 For commuters, it does not matter - they won't pay attention once they figure their route out. For sustainability, we need to get the "casual" transit user out of their cars. Those people are going to street address and random station codes don't correlate to the street address. Leads to frustration for the occasional user, that is the target of way finding.
@@underscorecascadian I can see how the station number system works for a certain demographic (e.g. nerds sitting around discussing the concept on a Zoom call). I look at it more from what it looks like in the "field", where a variety of demographics are represented. For many demographics, the occasional transit user is often headed to a street address - which does not correlate to a random station number. This demographic appreciates destinations with names for neighborhoods or streets and not just a random numbers. At least street numbers relate to a street grid system. I just recently used the rail system in Europe, where the local language was Dutch/Flemish. Although their system is technically excellent, it was very frustrating at times when the way finding in the stations was random and did not have anything to do with the destination address. Our phone app gave us track and train number, but the electronic reader board and train signage did not match with our destination.
The problem with Link is not the system's layout per se - it's the combination of the track layout with the type of train being used and other missing features. It's expensive to build due to being heavily elevated or tunneled, and adding on the extras to make it truly world class would likely not have added that much cost relatively. Automation, high floor trains with more doors/meter, and ideally platform screen doors would have meant more capacity per train (more interior space) and more capability for increased service. A Link train every 5 minutes once the bridge is connected has half the capacity of the same train every 2.5 minutes (not that uncommon), or a higher capacity train of the same length every 3 or 4 minutes. Higher frequency also allows smoother transfers, which we will have to have given we are designing the region's system as a hub and spoke model. I was just talking to my wife the other day about potentially taking Link to Lynnwood and catching Swift Orange to get to Alderwood mall, but the Swift Orange bus comes every 20 minutes instead of every 10. A double digit average wait time is pretty bad (of course, 10 minutes to wait is very different from waiting for only 2.5, but the point still stands: frequency is freeing). Of course, we cannot ignore the history, such as the fact that a highfloor train was probably completery impractical when Link was sharing space with the downtown bus tunnel. But, it's still worth pointing out where we could potentially improve things in the future while also recognizing that Link is mostly successful and popular *despite* its inefficient design.
Good point with Veterans Memorial Park near the MLT station. And good news I’m pretty sure there’s already plans to have it actually connect to the station
You said it well. Light rail doesn't have to suck and surprisingly this extension doesn't suck. It feels a lot like sky train but longer trains on a grade separated alignment. The federal way extension shows similar promise although it has to deal with MLK. Maybe in this century sound transit will cut and cover that portion to achieve higher speeds or even offer an alternative alignment that looks more like what's being built to Tacoma and Everett. Seattle really is challenging the couch arm urbanists that doubted this would work and I suspect there is going to be a lot of soul searching ince line two crosses lake Washington and shows the world a light rail system that functions like commuter rail and Metro depending on where it is.
Only solution I can think of for MLK is a bypass by Georgetown and Boeing Field, enabling MLK to be rebuilt. Then that bypass can be used for a needed permanent express line given the long time consuming length of the line to Tacoma.
@@LimitedWard Yes and that's why sound transit is now grade separating nearly all of its future expansions after clearly realizing MLK should have been a cut and cover design. Keep in mind the automation isn't as important as the grade separation, which is key to higher speeds and safely above and beyond anything else. If anything, sound transit wisely designed longer platforms than sky train to help future proof the system from a costly retrofit. However the point here is: what Seattle is building now is basically what Vancouver did decades ago and not a traditional light rail system like Portland or a longer version of Toronto's tram. And while they clearly didn't do it well in the MLK segment, they are doing it way better now even if the purists disagree light rail should be grade separated, elevated, buried, or go over the world's longest floating bridge. Seattle is being uncharacteristically bold here and it gets a ton of flak for something that's actually good now.
SoundTransit is already running trains at their maximum length most of the time. Once there are capacity issues in the future (which they may already hit with this extension until more trains are bought based on their own predictions), increasing frequency is the only way to increase capacity. Automation would make that significantly easier.
@@Norfirio You're mistaken. sound transit runs 3 or 2 cars during non peaks and weekends when there are no games. This is every 15-12 minutes as the demand is extremely low to justify anything more. sound transit isn't even hitting the planned frequency at peak hours because the maintenance depot in Bellevue can't reach line 1 until the bridge ties are fixed, and line two doesn't yet run to Lynnwood from CID as planned. So the top frequency with one line and the central depot is 8 minutes. with two lines and two depots is 5 minutes and theoretically can hit 4 minutes. Sound transit already announced frequencies of 5 minutes once it has access to its rolling stock in Bellevue which is basically sitting doing nothing as the order was for a two line system and not the starter line they are running at a fraction of the stock sitting there. and once line 3 runs from Lynnwood to West Seattle, the stations downtown can get a train every 2 minutes. in what planet is that not enough? 🤣. please stop making things up. and on what scenario does automation help anything? automation won't run any faster than the design spec of the track and plenty of systems in Europe and Japan run significantly higher number of trains without the need for automation. They better put the money on better access and connections to the Sounder and feeder buses than on some automation system nobody needs or is asking for.
Holy shit I can't believe I'm the only one thinking about 220th street! It would make my ability to get to the rail so much easier, as I am right by the WinCo, and that whole shopping area by the 99 is a really useful spot. The buses do NOT do this one spot any justice. It would have greatly served residents of Edmonds a bit better than the mountlake terrace station. The 119 bus only goes there from east edmonds once per HOUR which is so sad. An e-bike can get there on the inter-urban trail in maybe 6 minutes.
If i understand correctly, the stations are not actually "3 numbers", it's the line(s) and a two digit number. The stations that will interline once the 2 line connects over will be "(1) (2) 47", for example. Meaning, stop 47 on the 1 and 2 lines.
Took the train to the UW/Weber State game from Mountlake Terrace instead of Roosevelt. No paying $50 to park at the stadium. Can't wait until this gets up to Everett!
Just for the record, because the 2 Line isn't here yet, Sound Transit Express Route 510 will continue to serve downtown Seattle, and a new route 515 will go from Lynnwood to Seattle at peak times in hopes that some people will take the bus instead of the train (kind of ironic but it's fine) to alleviate crowds
Very funny that they removed one confusing stop name (University) and added another (Lynwood City Center). I can imagine many visitors accidentally going north instead of south when they see a train going to “city center.”
Big agree on the parking garages being oversized and lacking multi purpose land use opportunities. Every park and ride garage I've ever been to has been 95%+ empty. But maybe I just go at the wrong time?
Possibly. Location also matters as well. I use Link from the south so I use the garage at Angle Lake every time I travel up to Seattle. Levels 1 through 4 are consistently full and usually push levels 5 and 6 on event days. The main lot at Tukwila International is also consistently full most of the day as well.
Northgate park and ride was always very full on weekdays too. But they're at least making it more integrated into transit oriented development there, so hopefully the usage changes over timr
I checked out apartments near Mountlake Terrace and found 1-bedrooms for $2,300 and 2-bedrooms for $2,700. That's surprisingly higher than my mortgage for my much larger 2,100 square foot house. It makes me wonder who these apartments are intended for. It would be fantastic if city leaders could prioritize building affordable housing near transit hubs and stop allowing greedy developers to build here. They can't be the only game town. Affordable housing would greatly benefit workers who rely on public transportation because they struggle with the high cost of living in Seattle. The current situation feels a bit unfair, similar to ticket scalping. Access to affordable housing is crucial for a thriving community.
@@cmdrls212agreed, but this is a good question... why wasn't this 1/2 mile extension to Alderwood in the ST2 plans?... or at least something like the Redmond extension that wasn't funded but was prepared for.
@Acronym6197 because they are sitting on a shtload of land with a single developer. Look at Northgate. Regardless, Alderwood is still doing well now, and when ST2 was planned all that time ago malls were still very strong. I'm no fan of malls, I'm just giving you facts.
The sad but true answer is that in 2008, rail was primarily for suburbanites to access jobs in Seattle. So the rail went to the main Lynnwood bus transit center instead of the mall.
@@Acronym6197 Because when I got Lynnwood Transit Saturday, I still had to take a bus to Alderwood which was packed with people. The problem is no one thought through the end to end experience. Its totally ridiculous people will have to wait until 2037 to accessible 1 mile connection.
My hope is that this is so successful that other cities look at it and say "hey, we should replicate this." All transit stations should have these hallmarks: walkability, bikability, and dense, mixed-use TOD. We need to abandon the idea of people driving from home to a park n ride. Not to say they don't have their place, they absolutely do, but why not have all of that together in one place.
I’ve attempted to use the commuter systems. Arrive at Mountlake after 7am and there is no parking. Walking thru Veterans Park in the dark months is pitch black so parking by the library is not a good option. Also people living in houses usually hate apartments so they will just expand single family housing elsewhere if pushed. People in houses are connected to their community. People in apartments can’t name the people in the apartment next door. They are two different groups. The 15 Minute City looks good on paper but fails when it comes to the populous. I’ve lived in apartments, condos, townhomes, and houses. The latter in medium to low density is the only way I will go in the future.
Would love to live at an apartment around these places unfortunately every “affordable apartment” is going for like $1800 minimum with mfte certificates, these private companies are making it impossible/way too costly to actually utilize the walkable communities
If transit and walkable spaces made things affordable, NYC would be affordable. Amsterdam would be affordable. Tokyo would be affordable. Urbanists related transit to affordable housing but notice how they can never find it unless it is government mandated. Why? Because transit is not about affordable housing. It never has been. That's just a false pretense for what's really more like alternative lifestyle that is equally as unaffordable as suburban dwelling. For example, my 3br house 1 mile from the station is the same per month as a 2br apartment a walk from the station. Both are not affordable. I make way more than the median. If you want affordable, you gotta live in the countryside. It's how our forefathers did it and the reason countries sprawl. Cheap land is rural land. Next time you see somebody raving about the Netherlands. Ask them to explain why Amsterdam has a housing crisis 😂..
@@EricaGamet pretty high asking price, especially when most of the units in a lot do the newer buildings are vacant for months on end because of the pricing
If you're using an ORCA card, you have a 2 hour transfer window from your first tap for all of your trips. If you made 3 trips within that transfer window, then you only pay the highest fare of all of your transfers ($3 in this case). Otherwise, if you pay with other payment methods, then it would be $9 total.
I'm one of those people who says light rail sucks, and I'll explain why. The purpose of all LRT is to be able to operate on streets safely. That's the only real benefit it has over a light metro such as Skytrain. The downsides, especially of low floor light rail, are significant. Less room inside vehicles, lots of space dedicated to driver's cabs that aren't in use while trains are coupled together, awkward door layouts that make filling vehicles a challenge, and more expensive maintenance costs because everything in the bogies is cramped and hard to access. When your system is building all these huge concrete guideways and elevated stations, there isn't a good reason to stick with a vehicle that's designed to operate on streets. Obviously it's better to have this extension than to not have it, but Link is becoming one of the examples around the world of low-floor LRT being used in essentially the role of a high floor heavy rail metro, and the system would be better if the vehicles corresponded with the right of way.
Yes, yes all that. It was done for cost reasons and we have heard about it for a decade so maybe it is time to move on as it will only continue to expand which is rare in the US. Low floor trains are popular in the states and nothing is going to change as transit budgets get squeezed with post pandemic shifts. As far as technicalities of capacity, keep in mind link platforms are 120meters versus sky train 76m. This allows link to easily offset any loses from low floors and new rolling stock for middle cars without driver cabin could one day increase capacity more. Compared that to what Vancouver did was which was cheap out on platform length and now it is facing a monstrous retrofit in face of the huge deficit they are running that is all over the news. The grade separation of link is actually a really positive development. It allows 55mph operations and all the remaining extensions are grade separated or elevated. If anything, the difference is so jarring now that the same line speeds up north at full throttle on 4 car 120 meter long trains versus the south line that runs at grade. I can't wait to see the i90 floating bridge, the world's largest floating bridge with a light rail train going 55mph. It really goes to show Seattle doesn't honesty care that low floors are historically not used this way and that's the type of scrappy attitude transit agencies should seek. As more and more cities adopt low floor light rail to keep costs in check, the distinction of systems is staring to only matter to railfans with users not really caring as it practically behaves like a mid capacity commuter trains for all the suburbs and an underground metro for the city. More positives than negatives is a good change. Like the saying goes. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good
I think you're being too pedantic. Seattle is a minor city. It doesn't need anything better. It just needs reliable and frequent service using the stock they have and they will be fine. Overbuilding a system comes with maintenance costs too. They are getting good miles out of grade separation to cover suburban enclaves at 55mph and the underground at 35 mph. I don't think anyone is thinking about the floor height when they are zooming past traffic on an elevated guide. If anything, this type of project may catalyze the region into investing more and open more lines. If you look at the surveys and feedback from passengers as well as various interviews, people don't care about floor height. They care about safety, cleanliness, frequency, and time to destination. The money is best invested in that version fancy heavy rail solution that will cost more to build as even the current 54 billion price tag is attracting a lot of critics that are trying to kill the project as is.
Yeah, I think as long as it's couched in "here are the shortcomings of light rail and here's what we should build for our *next* train system", these sorts of complaints are potentially productive and useful. I'd love to see a robust debate about what kind of train we should build within a backdrop of a light rail system that is popular and has impressive ridership, and I think we're headed in that direction.
@@neonspark707sounds like you haven't ridden the Link at peak time. The wasted time has already added up having only four doors per unit side, and having so many obstructions to standing space, and wasting space on unused driver cabs. For sure the encouragement to develop more parallel rapidrides/ST/Swift services is good, however bus service has been emphasizing east-west connections to the Link spine. I hope ST will have enough trains and drivers and busses to make up for train form-factor
I know a lot of people who think that the suburbs are the end all solution to their problems. Too much crime? Move to the suburbs, Too much kidnapping? Suburbs. Traffic? Suburbs. Raising kids? Suburbs. What do you think. Is the city all that bad?
Honestly, those parking garages are very helpful for those of us (many of us) who live near enough to these stations to drive but far enough away to not be able to easily walk. Worse still, there's a lot of neighborhoods on the north side that are transit deserts. If you live there, you have no choice but to drive... so, in that regard these parking garages are a real godsend since it allows a lot of folks who would ordinally have no choice but to drive everywhere us to still use Light Rail and avoid needing to drive into Seattle every day. And honestly, if you're going to have parking at stations, parking garages are the best way to go, they save space by taking what would be an unholy sprawling single level parking lot and densify it into a more compact multi-story lot (if you want to see horrifyingly inefficient parking, look at California High Speed Rail's new stations). Parking garages are simply the most efficient type of parking possible, so please stop dinging Sound Transit on building these. Not everyone in the area is privileged enough to live near enough to easily accessible or efficient transit to avoid having a car; these garages really do improve the access equity of these new stations for a lot of folks.
I agree here. I do hope that Sound Transit replicates what was done with the Shoreline North parking garage for future garages though. An underground parking garage is the best case scenario if parking space is needed. That would free up the surface level for TOD development while still providing parking for suburbanites.
The problem with these stations is that there’s almost no reason for people from elsewhere to ride transit to visit these stations… unless I want to take my kids to go visit a bunch of parking garages.
Let's be real here, it's unlikely people were traveling to Shoreline/MLT/Lynnwood in the first place outside of commuters, especially when they lack city centers. They'll get built up over time, especially now since zoning reforms happened not too long ago.
I hate the fare change. Now that I can actually use the lightrail, the trips I'm most likely to make are now more expensive whereas the longer ones that I'm less likely to take are now less expensive. It kind of reminds me of turning 18 just after they lowered the rates for kids and those rates didn't change for many years, even as the adult fares kept increasing. I do get that this will help some people, it's just that there's a reason why they have distance based fares set up in the first place. You don't really want people going for longer than necessary trips. Especially if the final destination is halfish way between two stations.
There are trade offs to it. The outcome of the change means that Link's fare structure is now consistent with the fare structure of every other transit mode in the region (except the Sounder and Amtrak) as well as the low-income/senior flat fares, making it less confusing overall. In the grand scheme of things, an increase of $0.25-0.75 per non-transferred trip is not that much.
I do think it's super unfortunate that transit is so expensive to build that for many cities the only option is to build it right beside a freeway. Not only does that mean the catchment area of stations is essentially cut in half, but it also sets a sad precedent where dense forms of housing can only be built right beside cancer causing freeways. Obviously I'll take transit over no transit, but I'd prefer the extra money be spent to at least built it as a fully elevated system over a stroad instead of an at-grade system beside a highway.
I think the parking structures are modest at best. They are no bigger than a typical small raise condo tower. They are a nothing burger to complain about. I was just at the Lynnwood one and it was nearly full because of the concert. That's what like 1600 less cars going to a parking lot at the stadium? I thought thay was the point of it all and not for someone from Seattle to buy a gelato in Lynnwood by taking a half an hour train. They can get gelato in Seattle way faster.
I see it as a plus. Having a convenient place for people to park their cars so they can take transit into the city is a plus! I live in Capitol Hill and am glad that people are coming into the city in droves... and the packed trains I saw Friday up north, and the PAX and Bumbershoot folks cramming in on Saturday, tells me people will take transit... even the folks with cars up in the 'burbs!
@@EricaGamet It totally is a plus. The urbanist obsession that "you'll pay for our train but you can't park to use it" is honestly absurd when you rely on car driving suburban voters to approve your transit expansions each time. If the cost is a garage on every station, that's honestly a bargain compared to what suburban tax payers in snohomish and pierce are having to endure to build what hasn't even reached them yet. I consider myself lucky to have a station less than two miles away. But some of my friends in Everett and Tacoma have already told me they will vote against ST4 or any gap package for ST3 because they feel lied to, deceived, and asked to pay for a system they will never get to use by design. And I don't blame them one bit. It is an entirely reasonable position given the delays and hostility to park and rides some of the activists hold.
@@neonspark707 If it makes your friends feel any better (it won't haha), I voted and started paying for a lightrail extension and station in Colorado, where I haven't lived in 10+ years. I think they are building it now, finally! Transit moves slowly here in the US, wish it were quicker. And I wish everyone would and could take it, but that's not practical here. It's really not even practical in a lot of places we romanticize about (like northern England). But getting people to drive to transit that goes to the really congested but walkable areas is a huge plus!!
You need to get over your hatred of parking garages. These stations are located in the middle of large suburban areas. People in the suburbs need to be able to get to the stations, and buses aren’t going to do it. We are a car heavy society, and that’s not changing dramatically anytime soon.
Nah, that's wrong. The park and rides provide almost no actual ridership. It's something like 3k parking spots out of a projected 50k riders per day, if all people parking near stations are then getting on the train. People in the suburbs don't need to get to the stations. It's far better to bring where people live near the train station than to try to bring the trains to where people live, at least when the housing is this low density
Buses by statistical definition are going to “have to do it”. Or else the projected ridership would be 3k-10k riders, not 50k-70k long term This is why the extension is allegedly a big deal because it will be rendering multiple commuter bus routes obsolete and eliminated which community transit and king county metro will shift those service hours to frequent local east-west feeder routes from the suburbs and neighborhoods to stations, to build a more comprehensive frequent transit grid. All of this hinges on people getting out of their cars and getting on the bus
@@thespanishinquisiton8306 Bingo. Also there's no need to put the parking garages so close to the station. Who cares if a commuter's car, sitting inoperative all day long, is _close_ to the station? Whereas the people getting on and off the trains would all benefit from more amenities, shops, etc. nearby. Let the Park and Ride users walk one or two blocks.
@@thespanishinquisiton8306 the garages are voter approved. Suburban car owning voters that pay taxes in tabs each year for them. It doesn't matter if you like or hate them. Urbanites couldn't afford the bill so it is a nice compromise for a tiny garage when all the TOD can still happen around it. Time to move on. Seattle is infamous for voting down transit expansions until transit agencies learned most of the region is suburban and has no interest getting taxed for rail they can't use. It's just how things are here and more parking garages are part of ST3 so may as well get over it 😂.
You are correct, Ryan, we are a car-heavy society that isn't changing any time soon, but that doesn't mean changes can not start now. Not attempting to change things simply extends the "any time soon" longer than it needs to be.
Got to ride this yesterday, so cool finally having a station (somewhat) close to my house! I've talked with my friends about it, and even though some of us can drive we all agree it still feels like Seattle just became unlocked for us as a place to go, especially as minors meaning we get to ride for free. It's so liberating.
Hey check out the buses too, my friends and I like to go all around Western WA for free
I love all of the development going in around Lynnwood and the other stations, lots of transit oriented developments around the stations
Was just here for PAX and to visit my grandma and this extension was a GODSEND
I've lived here all my life but I was today years old when I learned there's a difference between "Montlake" and "Mountlake". Sometimes it takes someone new to an area who is taking the effort to learn about their new surroundings to teach the locals things they never bothered to learn. Thanks!
Oh great now I'm gna confuse them, I'm the opposite haha
Luckily, there is no "Montlake" station. It is called "University of Washington" instead. (Personally, I wish they used the name "Husky Stadium", since it's not really on the main campus of UW, but that's a different story).
@@BritishMetric144 That was my thought. It's even worse when you realize that there's no stations on campus and that most people who are new to the area are far more likely to think of the stadium than the campus. This sort of thing was pretty much inevitable given that there's a University and two streets named University in the city.
But it's not just "Mountlake", it's Mountlake Terrace.
So anytime you ever heard "Mountlake TERRACE" you thought they were just referring to Montlake?
Yup, took a joy ride from Roosevelt to Lynnwood for the hell of it this morning. The sun was shining and the train wasn't crowded... perfectamundo 👌🏿
One of the cool things about this is that there's a bus from Lynnwood to Alderwood mall, which should help a lot in terms of generating revenue for the area. There's times when I'd like to shop there for something small and wouldn't mind taking a bus and train up there.
@@SmallSpoonBrigade Swift Orange Line, right?
As a Texan who moved to Seattle a little over a year ago for work, I have a great deal of respect for what Seattle/Sound Transit have ushered in with Link. Two improvements to the system I would make over time would be:
1) Build station bypass tracks to create express service trains that can serve the region's major hubs and get people to their destination faster. The full build out of the planned light rail will be hilariously long rides for people commuting from Tacoma or Everett into Seattle or Bellevue if express service isn't provided.
2) Build parking structures with robust column grids that can be retrofitted over time to become occupiable real-estate (offices, residences). And, if nothing else, build store-front businesses on the first level of these structures.
I've been waiting on this extension for years and I'm so happy it's easier to get up to MLT to see my family now!
I rode it on Saturday. Took it from Lynnwood to Westlake and then took the monorail to the Seattle Center. Its a lot faster and cheaper than driving there and trying to find a parking spot.
the cybertruck is so funny
its such a brave little toaster
@@ricardoconqueso HAHA it's also so strong 💪(to keep on going after myself and everybody around me flip it off)
Thanks for this excellent report! Glad to have this line finished!
Its interesting that station is next to the interurban trail, to remind us how we used to have regional rail.
I was there on day 1! There was a whole festival at each of the new stops, I went to the Lynnwood one and there were two stages playing music!
Me too
Progress marches on! I hope sounds transit passes an ST4 plan to expedite further expansion tho
ST3 is already pushing people's patience and it is going off the rails in cost. So they probably know asking for more is not going to end well for them...
@@walawala-fo7dsvery true, but a man can hope haha. I do wish the politicians in Olympia would help out more with funding all the transit expansions across the state tho
@@mechayoshi9397they also have to worry about the ferries (the one to Sidney isn’t even running rn, and a few others are still on limited service), Amtrak Cascades (which is done in conjunction with Oregon and BC), and then there’s everyone east of the mountains they have to support as well. And they do that without any state income tax.
ST-4 should be about making the existing system work better. Fix up downtown stations, grade separate everything, increase frequency, later night trains, stuff like that. I think Sound Transit is going to be overwhelmed building the ST-3 lines for a while.
I completely agree. More night owl routes, frequency, etc. would be cheaper and wouldn’t overextend money and resources.
Interesting video - I knew about the University/Symphony name change but didn't know about the station numbering system. Thanks for the detailed rundown!
just moved here. i love line 1. can't wait for 2 to come into the city
The first time I saw the station codes on signage, I thought it was trying to indicate bus route connections. Took a second to realize what they were doing after seeing them all listed out.
Thanks for this thorough and positive review! I walked many of those same station areas this weekend. Very suburban as of now, but each area is beginning a transformation.
I rode to the lynnwood station today and biked along the trail and road to get to Edmonds. It was something I never would’ve dreamed of doing before
I think the point Reece Martin is making is that if you are doing something grade-separated you might as well go for heavy rail. The only advantage of light rail is that it _can_ run on the street, whereas it has many downsides.
Which is rather narrow minded as the counter point to his point is that cost of heavy rail metro is also a huge downside. With systems across North America having massive pressure to reduce costs post pandemic patterns, going heavy rail is very risky. Sure you can opt for reducing system size just to have it be heavy rail, but that can hurt transit more than help it. This extension was approved in 2008 and still just barely touched the 3rd most populous county in the state. Heavy Metro would be nicer but how many more decades and billions would that cost when voters wanted something now...and they had to wait almost two decades 😂
We already see Vancouver come to grips with a massive shortfall that is making the news and will mean less expansions, reduced service, and worse performance just because they overbuilt the system for the region. Sound transit might have underbuilt its system but in a day and age we are at where public transit funding remains very divisive and cost overruns grab the headlines as austerity and a recession loom....I have to say sound transit made the right bet for once.
Yes, everyone wants the Jurassic Park approach to transit where you spare no expense. Unfortunately that just means a financial disaster that hurts transit long term and casts a shadow on future projects.
Seattle is showing how to stretch those light rail dollars cash strapped cities are watching for sure. Yeah it is probably a flawed system and will remain so. But we're actually talking Seattle here taking risks. Remember it's a city that voted down multiple systems in the past and even turned down a subway. The fact the region has built this much is actually surprising.
He complains about it not being grade separated and how trams that are at grade are bad and prone to accidents..., then complains when it is grade separated because trams should not be grade separated.
Everyone knows people like that. No matter what, they argue whatever position is contrarian 😂
Funniest facts is the vast majority of people don't care about floor height. They care about one thing: when is the next train arriving. Frequency is king and floor doesn't determine frequency.
@@cmdrls212 Light rail is cheaper... because you don't have to grade separate it... The major costs are the stations and the right of way - the trains themselves are a rounding error.
@@walawala-fo7ds if you can move more people with fewer drivers (which high floor lets you do), then you can run more trains, ergo more frequency. Not sure what's confusing about this. He's arguing for getting the most transit per dollar.
@@cmdrls212the higher costs for heavy rail in Seattle is because they need new yards+maintenance, not because the trains are bigger, and the 1 line is so grade-separated that the guide way and tunnel costs are same as heavy rail. Ik the street-running part was needed for the line to exist in the first place
West Seattle link should be light metro for the same reason
2 line on the other hand has level crossings that warrant light rail, and the floating bridge stretch is likely not traversable by normal trains
Something good about all the parking that may be unintuitive is that parking was actually recently removed from Northgate for a transit oriented development, similar to the one planned for Lynnwood City Center. I’m happy more parking is being added up north bc there’s all kinds of commuters from folks up north in, say, Everett, or even Bellingham, that drive down to park and use the system. I’m glad that parking is moving further north to reduce vmt and densify neighborhoods closer in to the city
I’m one of those from Bellingham. As someone who frequently travels to Seattle, I’ll (and have already) use Link every time to avoid having to deal with parking and traffic when going to events and things to do there.
very informative,better than what they have put out to date. thanks.
Auto lobbies and big oil hate this 😂
They can only dream of such a wonderful scam: 161 billion for an endless money pit, zero accountability for the constant construction mistakes, all funded by people who don't use it. Just wait till they begin reducing the amount of trains per day, then you're going to have a LOT of fun. It's projected to pay for itself in about 4,000 years according to Sound Transit ridership estimates (not including maintenance and overhead, of course).
I definitely agree about the golf course. There’s plenty of areas in Seattle and the surrounding area that still need up zoning and more housing. I don’t think we need to give up one of the biggest green spaces we have, because once gone, they rarely ever return. I wish the whole thing would be a park though, that much space for a single use activity that most people will never engage in is absurd in a major city, particularly near two light rail stations. Golf has been trending downwards in popularity for a long time now and can present issues with water usage and chemical fertilizers.
I wish it was tennis, basketball, and pickleball courts.
You sound so much happier being in the Seattle metro area than Reno.
about the lack of a station between Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace, there is (apparently) supposed to be a possible space for an infill station not at 220th, but at 212th. Although this station has been deferred for the time being. This was also going to be the case with 130th Street, although high support from local residents and neighborhood councils made the station start construction around 2 years ago. It's interesting how there's no reserved code for this infill station, which might mean that it really isn't planned any time soon or at all, I honestly have no clue.
130th was part of sound transit 3. 220th is not part of anything voter approved so there is nothing to fast track. As per comments about the golf course in130th, this 200 million dollar golf course station expense is constantly challenged as it is within walking distance of shoreline south and slows trains down for basically no gains that aren't already realized in Northgate and shoreline south. But that aside, the lot on 220th is construction staging not station intended. It wouldn't make much sense to slow down an already overburdened system with so many stops in such sparsely populated area. Add too many stops in this suburban area that is considerably far from Seattle, and soon the system becomes inefficient and unable to get up to speed, which it needs to do because you're literally in the next county over to here Seattle is.
The existing stations also have tons of room for densification before anything at 220th is needed not to mention 220th is extremely close to Mount Lake Terrace station already, which is where the urban core is for that city as well as Lynnwood City center. 220th is part of mount lake terrace, and there are no plans or need to create a second city center there when the existing space allocated in MLT downtown isn't even being used.
I get it that in some circles more stations more good, but that's on smaller systems that don't have to cover such vast distances the way link does. Remember this system needs to go to Everett. If anything I'd argue it already has one or two stops too many that exist only to appease overzealous activists.
Yes, I get everyone wants a station because light rail is the new shiny. But if everyone gets one, the system will be so inefficient that it's appeal and ridership will tank as it will spend more time stopping than actually going anywhere.
A better approach is to build a second line on sr99 or i405. Space the stations at offsets with link so that you can choose which line to use based on your location and only stop half as frequently.
11:53 Thank you so much for saying this. It really means a lot. We get so much hate and it's very unwarranted.
With this opening, won’t Seattle be the busiest light rail system in the U.S.? It should be pushing 120,000-130,000 daily riders.
If forecasts hold yes. That's probably what angers some pundits. Light rail shouldn't be this good at moving this many people.
When finished it will be nearly 100 miles long with 4 lines. It will be the one of the biggest light rail systems in the world and certainly biggest in North America.
Unfortunately red tape means it will take two more decades to finish 😂
@@walawala-fo7dswould be nice if the feds had some infrastructure financing to allow us to leverage our local tax dollars... build it out now versus over 25 years when costs go up, no sales tax on construction, supplemental federal funds, etc.
Love the extension. Reinforces in my mind that the light rail must go to West Seattle and Ballard. Buses just don’t cut it. As someone that worked for 37 years in way finding, transportation planning & design, and most importantly, operations, the station codes are a dumb idea.
The station codes will be useful for people navigating on their phones, tourists and the like. Especially if they don’t speak English, much easier to match up a number on your phone than a random name in a language (or maybe even alphabet) you don’t understand. Besides, it has no downside other than making the map look slightly messier and a few extra cents of ink.
Why are station codes a dumb idea? Genuine question
I like the idea of station codes, but I hate the implementation. Once East Link connects, each overlapping station will have two different stations codes (e.g. 1-50 and 2-50) even though they're the same place.
@@lchap0506 For commuters, it does not matter - they won't pay attention once they figure their route out. For sustainability, we need to get the "casual" transit user out of their cars. Those people are going to street address and random station codes don't correlate to the street address. Leads to frustration for the occasional user, that is the target of way finding.
@@underscorecascadian I can see how the station number system works for a certain demographic (e.g. nerds sitting around discussing the concept on a Zoom call). I look at it more from what it looks like in the "field", where a variety of demographics are represented. For many demographics, the occasional transit user is often headed to a street address - which does not correlate to a random station number. This demographic appreciates destinations with names for neighborhoods or streets and not just a random numbers. At least street numbers relate to a street grid system. I just recently used the rail system in Europe, where the local language was Dutch/Flemish. Although their system is technically excellent, it was very frustrating at times when the way finding in the stations was random and did not have anything to do with the destination address. Our phone app gave us track and train number, but the electronic reader board and train signage did not match with our destination.
The problem with Link is not the system's layout per se - it's the combination of the track layout with the type of train being used and other missing features.
It's expensive to build due to being heavily elevated or tunneled, and adding on the extras to make it truly world class would likely not have added that much cost relatively. Automation, high floor trains with more doors/meter, and ideally platform screen doors would have meant more capacity per train (more interior space) and more capability for increased service. A Link train every 5 minutes once the bridge is connected has half the capacity of the same train every 2.5 minutes (not that uncommon), or a higher capacity train of the same length every 3 or 4 minutes. Higher frequency also allows smoother transfers, which we will have to have given we are designing the region's system as a hub and spoke model. I was just talking to my wife the other day about potentially taking Link to Lynnwood and catching Swift Orange to get to Alderwood mall, but the Swift Orange bus comes every 20 minutes instead of every 10. A double digit average wait time is pretty bad (of course, 10 minutes to wait is very different from waiting for only 2.5, but the point still stands: frequency is freeing).
Of course, we cannot ignore the history, such as the fact that a highfloor train was probably completery impractical when Link was sharing space with the downtown bus tunnel. But, it's still worth pointing out where we could potentially improve things in the future while also recognizing that Link is mostly successful and popular *despite* its inefficient design.
Great work, Sean!!
Good point with Veterans Memorial Park near the MLT station. And good news I’m pretty sure there’s already plans to have it actually connect to the station
You said it well. Light rail doesn't have to suck and surprisingly this extension doesn't suck. It feels a lot like sky train but longer trains on a grade separated alignment. The federal way extension shows similar promise although it has to deal with MLK. Maybe in this century sound transit will cut and cover that portion to achieve higher speeds or even offer an alternative alignment that looks more like what's being built to Tacoma and Everett.
Seattle really is challenging the couch arm urbanists that doubted this would work and I suspect there is going to be a lot of soul searching ince line two crosses lake Washington and shows the world a light rail system that functions like commuter rail and Metro depending on where it is.
Only solution I can think of for MLK is a bypass by Georgetown and Boeing Field, enabling MLK to be rebuilt. Then that bypass can be used for a needed permanent express line given the long time consuming length of the line to Tacoma.
I'm confused. Sky train already has a grade separated alignment, no? Also sky train is fully automated, which is a huge plus.
@@LimitedWard Yes and that's why sound transit is now grade separating nearly all of its future expansions after clearly realizing MLK should have been a cut and cover design. Keep in mind the automation isn't as important as the grade separation, which is key to higher speeds and safely above and beyond anything else. If anything, sound transit wisely designed longer platforms than sky train to help future proof the system from a costly retrofit.
However the point here is: what Seattle is building now is basically what Vancouver did decades ago and not a traditional light rail system like Portland or a longer version of Toronto's tram.
And while they clearly didn't do it well in the MLK segment, they are doing it way better now even if the purists disagree light rail should be grade separated, elevated, buried, or go over the world's longest floating bridge. Seattle is being uncharacteristically bold here and it gets a ton of flak for something that's actually good now.
SoundTransit is already running trains at their maximum length most of the time. Once there are capacity issues in the future (which they may already hit with this extension until more trains are bought based on their own predictions), increasing frequency is the only way to increase capacity. Automation would make that significantly easier.
@@Norfirio You're mistaken. sound transit runs 3 or 2 cars during non peaks and weekends when there are no games. This is every 15-12 minutes as the demand is extremely low to justify anything more. sound transit isn't even hitting the planned frequency at peak hours because the maintenance depot in Bellevue can't reach line 1 until the bridge ties are fixed, and line two doesn't yet run to Lynnwood from CID as planned. So the top frequency with one line and the central depot is 8 minutes. with two lines and two depots is 5 minutes and theoretically can hit 4 minutes. Sound transit already announced frequencies of 5 minutes once it has access to its rolling stock in Bellevue which is basically sitting doing nothing as the order was for a two line system and not the starter line they are running at a fraction of the stock sitting there.
and once line 3 runs from Lynnwood to West Seattle, the stations downtown can get a train every 2 minutes. in what planet is that not enough? 🤣. please stop making things up.
and on what scenario does automation help anything? automation won't run any faster than the design spec of the track and plenty of systems in Europe and Japan run significantly higher number of trains without the need for automation. They better put the money on better access and connections to the Sounder and feeder buses than on some automation system nobody needs or is asking for.
Super cool! Thanks for the comprehensive video. Especially the cyber truck shot lmao
Holy shit I can't believe I'm the only one thinking about 220th street!
It would make my ability to get to the rail so much easier, as I am right by the WinCo, and that whole shopping area by the 99 is a really useful spot.
The buses do NOT do this one spot any justice.
It would have greatly served residents of Edmonds a bit better than the mountlake terrace station. The 119 bus only goes there from east edmonds once per HOUR which is so sad. An e-bike can get there on the inter-urban trail in maybe 6 minutes.
If i understand correctly, the stations are not actually "3 numbers", it's the line(s) and a two digit number. The stations that will interline once the 2 line connects over will be "(1) (2) 47", for example. Meaning, stop 47 on the 1 and 2 lines.
Took the train to the UW/Weber State game from Mountlake Terrace instead of Roosevelt. No paying $50 to park at the stadium. Can't wait until this gets up to Everett!
8:00 yeah walking around the east and north sides of that golf course is really gross
Yep i live near there and it sucks
I did the challenge of visiting all four new stations and got my commemorative hat 🎉❤
Just for the record, because the 2 Line isn't here yet, Sound Transit Express Route 510 will continue to serve downtown Seattle, and a new route 515 will go from Lynnwood to Seattle at peak times in hopes that some people will take the bus instead of the train (kind of ironic but it's fine) to alleviate crowds
Very funny that they removed one confusing stop name (University) and added another (Lynwood City Center). I can imagine many visitors accidentally going north instead of south when they see a train going to “city center.”
Big agree on the parking garages being oversized and lacking multi purpose land use opportunities. Every park and ride garage I've ever been to has been 95%+ empty. But maybe I just go at the wrong time?
Possibly. Location also matters as well. I use Link from the south so I use the garage at Angle Lake every time I travel up to Seattle. Levels 1 through 4 are consistently full and usually push levels 5 and 6 on event days. The main lot at Tukwila International is also consistently full most of the day as well.
Northgate park and ride was always very full on weekdays too. But they're at least making it more integrated into transit oriented development there, so hopefully the usage changes over timr
I checked out apartments near Mountlake Terrace and found 1-bedrooms for $2,300 and 2-bedrooms for $2,700. That's surprisingly higher than my mortgage for my much larger 2,100 square foot house. It makes me wonder who these apartments are intended for.
It would be fantastic if city leaders could prioritize building affordable housing near transit hubs and stop allowing greedy developers to build here. They can't be the only game town.
Affordable housing would greatly benefit workers who rely on public transportation because they struggle with the high cost of living in Seattle. The current situation feels a bit unfair, similar to ticket scalping. Access to affordable housing is crucial for a thriving community.
Why was it so hard to complete the extra couple miles to the Alderwood Mall?
It is. This is sound transit 2. The alderwood mall is sound transit 3. Entirely different projects. Once was approved in 2008 and the other 2016
@@cmdrls212agreed, but this is a good question... why wasn't this 1/2 mile extension to Alderwood in the ST2 plans?... or at least something like the Redmond extension that wasn't funded but was prepared for.
@Acronym6197 because they are sitting on a shtload of land with a single developer. Look at Northgate. Regardless, Alderwood is still doing well now, and when ST2 was planned all that time ago malls were still very strong. I'm no fan of malls, I'm just giving you facts.
The sad but true answer is that in 2008, rail was primarily for suburbanites to access jobs in Seattle. So the rail went to the main Lynnwood bus transit center instead of the mall.
@@Acronym6197 Because when I got Lynnwood Transit Saturday, I still had to take a bus to Alderwood which was packed with people. The problem is no one thought through the end to end experience. Its totally ridiculous people will have to wait until 2037 to accessible 1 mile connection.
It took me a hot minute to figure out this was in Seattle
My hope is that this is so successful that other cities look at it and say "hey, we should replicate this." All transit stations should have these hallmarks: walkability, bikability, and dense, mixed-use TOD. We need to abandon the idea of people driving from home to a park n ride. Not to say they don't have their place, they absolutely do, but why not have all of that together in one place.
I’ve attempted to use the commuter systems. Arrive at Mountlake after 7am and there is no parking. Walking thru Veterans Park in the dark months is pitch black so parking by the library is not a good option. Also people living in houses usually hate apartments so they will just expand single family housing elsewhere if pushed. People in houses are connected to their community. People in apartments can’t name the people in the apartment next door. They are two different groups. The 15 Minute City looks good on paper but fails when it comes to the populous. I’ve lived in apartments, condos, townhomes, and houses. The latter in medium to low density is the only way I will go in the future.
Would love to live at an apartment around these places unfortunately every “affordable apartment” is going for like $1800 minimum with mfte certificates, these private companies are making it impossible/way too costly to actually utilize the walkable communities
For context I lived on Northgate for 3 years paying the lowest rent I could get which was $1600 for a one bedroom
If transit and walkable spaces made things affordable, NYC would be affordable. Amsterdam would be affordable. Tokyo would be affordable.
Urbanists related transit to affordable housing but notice how they can never find it unless it is government mandated.
Why? Because transit is not about affordable housing. It never has been. That's just a false pretense for what's really more like alternative lifestyle that is equally as unaffordable as suburban dwelling. For example, my 3br house 1 mile from the station is the same per month as a 2br apartment a walk from the station. Both are not affordable. I make way more than the median. If you want affordable, you gotta live in the countryside. It's how our forefathers did it and the reason countries sprawl. Cheap land is rural land.
Next time you see somebody raving about the Netherlands. Ask them to explain why Amsterdam has a housing crisis 😂..
I saw one in Lynwood (didn't realize it was MFTE at first) that started at $1460 I think. City Center Apartments, maybe?
@@cmdrls212 please return to wherever you came from or broaden your horizons, I am not on your side
@@EricaGamet pretty high asking price, especially when most of the units in a lot do the newer buildings are vacant for months on end because of the pricing
Are 3 short rides $9? If the fare is $3/ride.
If you're using an ORCA card, you have a 2 hour transfer window from your first tap for all of your trips. If you made 3 trips within that transfer window, then you only pay the highest fare of all of your transfers ($3 in this case). Otherwise, if you pay with other payment methods, then it would be $9 total.
Oh yes Stride. Not to be confused with Swift: Bus "Rapid" Transit that already exists in Snohomish County.
I'm one of those people who says light rail sucks, and I'll explain why. The purpose of all LRT is to be able to operate on streets safely. That's the only real benefit it has over a light metro such as Skytrain. The downsides, especially of low floor light rail, are significant. Less room inside vehicles, lots of space dedicated to driver's cabs that aren't in use while trains are coupled together, awkward door layouts that make filling vehicles a challenge, and more expensive maintenance costs because everything in the bogies is cramped and hard to access. When your system is building all these huge concrete guideways and elevated stations, there isn't a good reason to stick with a vehicle that's designed to operate on streets.
Obviously it's better to have this extension than to not have it, but Link is becoming one of the examples around the world of low-floor LRT being used in essentially the role of a high floor heavy rail metro, and the system would be better if the vehicles corresponded with the right of way.
Yes, yes all that. It was done for cost reasons and we have heard about it for a decade so maybe it is time to move on as it will only continue to expand which is rare in the US.
Low floor trains are popular in the states and nothing is going to change as transit budgets get squeezed with post pandemic shifts.
As far as technicalities of capacity, keep in mind link platforms are 120meters versus sky train 76m. This allows link to easily offset any loses from low floors and new rolling stock for middle cars without driver cabin could one day increase capacity more. Compared that to what Vancouver did was which was cheap out on platform length and now it is facing a monstrous retrofit in face of the huge deficit they are running that is all over the news.
The grade separation of link is actually a really positive development. It allows 55mph operations and all the remaining extensions are grade separated or elevated. If anything, the difference is so jarring now that the same line speeds up north at full throttle on 4 car 120 meter long trains versus the south line that runs at grade.
I can't wait to see the i90 floating bridge, the world's largest floating bridge with a light rail train going 55mph. It really goes to show Seattle doesn't honesty care that low floors are historically not used this way and that's the type of scrappy attitude transit agencies should seek.
As more and more cities adopt low floor light rail to keep costs in check, the distinction of systems is staring to only matter to railfans with users not really caring as it practically behaves like a mid capacity commuter trains for all the suburbs and an underground metro for the city.
More positives than negatives is a good change. Like the saying goes. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good
I think you're being too pedantic. Seattle is a minor city. It doesn't need anything better. It just needs reliable and frequent service using the stock they have and they will be fine.
Overbuilding a system comes with maintenance costs too. They are getting good miles out of grade separation to cover suburban enclaves at 55mph and the underground at 35 mph. I don't think anyone is thinking about the floor height when they are zooming past traffic on an elevated guide.
If anything, this type of project may catalyze the region into investing more and open more lines. If you look at the surveys and feedback from passengers as well as various interviews, people don't care about floor height. They care about safety, cleanliness, frequency, and time to destination. The money is best invested in that version fancy heavy rail solution that will cost more to build as even the current 54 billion price tag is attracting a lot of critics that are trying to kill the project as is.
Yeah, I think as long as it's couched in "here are the shortcomings of light rail and here's what we should build for our *next* train system", these sorts of complaints are potentially productive and useful. I'd love to see a robust debate about what kind of train we should build within a backdrop of a light rail system that is popular and has impressive ridership, and I think we're headed in that direction.
I would have preferred Denver-style EMUs for Link
@@neonspark707sounds like you haven't ridden the Link at peak time. The wasted time has already added up having only four doors per unit side, and having so many obstructions to standing space, and wasting space on unused driver cabs. For sure the encouragement to develop more parallel rapidrides/ST/Swift services is good, however bus service has been emphasizing east-west connections to the Link spine.
I hope ST will have enough trains and drivers and busses to make up for train form-factor
I know a lot of people who think that the suburbs are the end all solution to their problems. Too much crime? Move to the suburbs, Too much kidnapping? Suburbs. Traffic? Suburbs. Raising kids? Suburbs.
What do you think. Is the city all that bad?
Honestly, those parking garages are very helpful for those of us (many of us) who live near enough to these stations to drive but far enough away to not be able to easily walk. Worse still, there's a lot of neighborhoods on the north side that are transit deserts. If you live there, you have no choice but to drive... so, in that regard these parking garages are a real godsend since it allows a lot of folks who would ordinally have no choice but to drive everywhere us to still use Light Rail and avoid needing to drive into Seattle every day.
And honestly, if you're going to have parking at stations, parking garages are the best way to go, they save space by taking what would be an unholy sprawling single level parking lot and densify it into a more compact multi-story lot (if you want to see horrifyingly inefficient parking, look at California High Speed Rail's new stations). Parking garages are simply the most efficient type of parking possible, so please stop dinging Sound Transit on building these. Not everyone in the area is privileged enough to live near enough to easily accessible or efficient transit to avoid having a car; these garages really do improve the access equity of these new stations for a lot of folks.
I agree here. I do hope that Sound Transit replicates what was done with the Shoreline North parking garage for future garages though. An underground parking garage is the best case scenario if parking space is needed. That would free up the surface level for TOD development while still providing parking for suburbanites.
@@TheTikeySauce That's a great point and I agree 100%! : )
The problem with these stations is that there’s almost no reason for people from elsewhere to ride transit to visit these stations… unless I want to take my kids to go visit a bunch of parking garages.
Let's be real here, it's unlikely people were traveling to Shoreline/MLT/Lynnwood in the first place outside of commuters, especially when they lack city centers. They'll get built up over time, especially now since zoning reforms happened not too long ago.
I hate the fare change. Now that I can actually use the lightrail, the trips I'm most likely to make are now more expensive whereas the longer ones that I'm less likely to take are now less expensive. It kind of reminds me of turning 18 just after they lowered the rates for kids and those rates didn't change for many years, even as the adult fares kept increasing.
I do get that this will help some people, it's just that there's a reason why they have distance based fares set up in the first place. You don't really want people going for longer than necessary trips. Especially if the final destination is halfish way between two stations.
There are trade offs to it. The outcome of the change means that Link's fare structure is now consistent with the fare structure of every other transit mode in the region (except the Sounder and Amtrak) as well as the low-income/senior flat fares, making it less confusing overall. In the grand scheme of things, an increase of $0.25-0.75 per non-transferred trip is not that much.
I do think it's super unfortunate that transit is so expensive to build that for many cities the only option is to build it right beside a freeway. Not only does that mean the catchment area of stations is essentially cut in half, but it also sets a sad precedent where dense forms of housing can only be built right beside cancer causing freeways. Obviously I'll take transit over no transit, but I'd prefer the extra money be spent to at least built it as a fully elevated system over a stroad instead of an at-grade system beside a highway.
Just swap the positions of the bike lane and parked cars! C'mon, people!!
whole city is like that
Mfw community transit ignores its riders pleas to keep its commuter routes
All of the new apartments can’t help anything if they are market rate and necessary-for-liberty rent control remains illegal.
no body is paying!!!!
7:26
So... between three churches.
That's the joke...
@@YetAnotherUrbanist And it was hilarious. Even funnier that it'll go over your head if you don't speak Spanish or read my comment.
@@loneIyboy15It was also on screen, so if someone doesn't know what an iglesia is, they could pause and see that
Taking sweet-arse long time to extend out on the south side. These builders discriminate against ghetto South end Federal Way.
I think the parking structures are modest at best. They are no bigger than a typical small raise condo tower. They are a nothing burger to complain about. I was just at the Lynnwood one and it was nearly full because of the concert. That's what like 1600 less cars going to a parking lot at the stadium? I thought thay was the point of it all and not for someone from Seattle to buy a gelato in Lynnwood by taking a half an hour train. They can get gelato in Seattle way faster.
I see it as a plus. Having a convenient place for people to park their cars so they can take transit into the city is a plus! I live in Capitol Hill and am glad that people are coming into the city in droves... and the packed trains I saw Friday up north, and the PAX and Bumbershoot folks cramming in on Saturday, tells me people will take transit... even the folks with cars up in the 'burbs!
@@EricaGamet It totally is a plus. The urbanist obsession that "you'll pay for our train but you can't park to use it" is honestly absurd when you rely on car driving suburban voters to approve your transit expansions each time. If the cost is a garage on every station, that's honestly a bargain compared to what suburban tax payers in snohomish and pierce are having to endure to build what hasn't even reached them yet. I consider myself lucky to have a station less than two miles away. But some of my friends in Everett and Tacoma have already told me they will vote against ST4 or any gap package for ST3 because they feel lied to, deceived, and asked to pay for a system they will never get to use by design. And I don't blame them one bit. It is an entirely reasonable position given the delays and hostility to park and rides some of the activists hold.
@@neonspark707 If it makes your friends feel any better (it won't haha), I voted and started paying for a lightrail extension and station in Colorado, where I haven't lived in 10+ years. I think they are building it now, finally! Transit moves slowly here in the US, wish it were quicker. And I wish everyone would and could take it, but that's not practical here. It's really not even practical in a lot of places we romanticize about (like northern England). But getting people to drive to transit that goes to the really congested but walkable areas is a huge plus!!
I like how no one in that video tapped their orca card. Gotta love it. These people will keep us from progressing faster.
Great video, but you should really consider getting another narrator.
World’s most expensive Trolley.
Should have been a three track automated metro.
You need to get over your hatred of parking garages. These stations are located in the middle of large suburban areas. People in the suburbs need to be able to get to the stations, and buses aren’t going to do it. We are a car heavy society, and that’s not changing dramatically anytime soon.
Nah, that's wrong. The park and rides provide almost no actual ridership. It's something like 3k parking spots out of a projected 50k riders per day, if all people parking near stations are then getting on the train. People in the suburbs don't need to get to the stations. It's far better to bring where people live near the train station than to try to bring the trains to where people live, at least when the housing is this low density
Buses by statistical definition are going to “have to do it”. Or else the projected ridership would be 3k-10k riders, not 50k-70k long term
This is why the extension is allegedly a big deal because it will be rendering multiple commuter bus routes obsolete and eliminated which community transit and king county metro will shift those service hours to frequent local east-west feeder routes from the suburbs and neighborhoods to stations, to build a more comprehensive frequent transit grid. All of this hinges on people getting out of their cars and getting on the bus
@@thespanishinquisiton8306 Bingo. Also there's no need to put the parking garages so close to the station. Who cares if a commuter's car, sitting inoperative all day long, is _close_ to the station? Whereas the people getting on and off the trains would all benefit from more amenities, shops, etc. nearby. Let the Park and Ride users walk one or two blocks.
@@thespanishinquisiton8306 the garages are voter approved. Suburban car owning voters that pay taxes in tabs each year for them. It doesn't matter if you like or hate them. Urbanites couldn't afford the bill so it is a nice compromise for a tiny garage when all the TOD can still happen around it. Time to move on. Seattle is infamous for voting down transit expansions until transit agencies learned most of the region is suburban and has no interest getting taxed for rail they can't use. It's just how things are here and more parking garages are part of ST3 so may as well get over it 😂.
You are correct, Ryan, we are a car-heavy society that isn't changing any time soon, but that doesn't mean changes can not start now.
Not attempting to change things simply extends the "any time soon" longer than it needs to be.
Transit Oriented Development has ruined the quality of life in the Seattle area.