Comments on: The TOD Challenge: How do we make a circle from a line? (Part 1 in a series) http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/ Efficiency is the straightest path to hell.* Thu, 08 Jan 2009 13:12:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2 by: Roger P. http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3735 Sat, 05 Jul 2008 18:40:00 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3735 Dan, the devil's in the details, as they say. First, we have to engage a meaningful neighborhood process (yes, I don't like the word much either, but for the lack of a better one at the moment...) to determine what the community would like to see happen. I doubt seriously that anything approaching a "neighborhood consensus" in favor of no upzones would occur. The issue would more likely be: how high the upzones?, over how extensive an area?, and what do the non-upzoned areas get in return? I'm reachable at rpence (at) cablespeed.com, if you'd like to discuss. Dan, the devil’s in the details, as they say. First, we have to engage a meaningful neighborhood process (yes, I don’t like the word much either, but for the lack of a better one at the moment…) to determine what the community would like to see happen. I doubt seriously that anything approaching a “neighborhood consensus” in favor of no upzones would occur. The issue would more likely be: how high the upzones?, over how extensive an area?, and what do the non-upzoned areas get in return? I’m reachable at rpence (at) cablespeed.com, if you’d like to discuss.

]]> by: dan bertolet http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3200 Wed, 25 Jun 2008 05:12:46 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3200 Roger, thanks for all the thoughtful comments. Here is a hypothetical question for you (and anyone else): what if, after the community involvement process, the Beacon Hill neighborhood consensus is to reject any upzones in the station area? Would you support the City overruling the neighborhood and upzoning anyway? Roger, thanks for all the thoughtful comments.

Here is a hypothetical question for you (and anyone else): what if, after the community involvement process, the Beacon Hill neighborhood consensus is to reject any upzones in the station area? Would you support the City overruling the neighborhood and upzoning anyway?

]]> by: Roger P. http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3138 Mon, 23 Jun 2008 06:45:41 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3138 Small turnout but great thoughts expressed. For those of us who work 8 to 5, early morning is often the best choice. After work often interferes with family and other community events and activities. Suggestions re meeting times/places are welcome. I am strongly of the opinion that blogs and such are great at raising issues but lousy at making progress towards workable solutions. For those of us who care about these issues on Beacon Hill, we need to be meeting face to face. Small turnout but great thoughts expressed. For those of us who work 8 to 5, early morning is often the best choice. After work often interferes with family and other community events and activities. Suggestions re meeting times/places are welcome.

I am strongly of the opinion that blogs and such are great at raising issues but lousy at making progress towards workable solutions. For those of us who care about these issues on Beacon Hill, we need to be meeting face to face.

]]> by: litlnemo http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3117 Sat, 21 Jun 2008 19:55:11 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3117 I wonder if anyone showed up. 7:45am is not an ideal time for me, at least. I wonder if anyone showed up. 7:45am is not an ideal time for me, at least.

]]> by: Roger Pence http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3072 Wed, 18 Jun 2008 22:06:21 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3072 The Beacon Hill tunnel routing came about after Sound Transit failed to find a satisfactory way to build via Dearborn and Rainier Ave., the original planned corridor. The first take on the BH tunnel did not have a station included, but after ST analyzed projected ridership data, they concluded it would have even higher ridership than the Rainier Valley stations, thus the decision to include a station. The NEXT cut had a station shell being built, but due to funding limitations, not finished until a later phase. The community objected to not getting a functioning station, and with the high ridership projections ST revised the budget to include the station in the Initial Segment plan. And as noted already, that plan was adopted by the ST board in November 2001. Zoning density actually had little or nothing to do with the station/no station decision by ST. Federal rules require transit agencies to NOT include speculative future development in making its ridership projections. The Feds look at "present trends continued", not "what if" scenarions based on more intense zoning not yet adopted. That said, my personal opinion is that higher density zoning is warranted near the BH Station. Even though this area underwent "station area planning" under Mayor Paul Schell, little change resulted from that process (which came AFTER the neighborhood had already spent years on neighborhood planning; neighbors were truly exhausted by planning processes). Schell's station area plan left single-family zoning right across the street from the station! I think there's lots of potential for better planning/zoning in my Beacon Hill community, but we have to involve the community, folks with different points of view -- and there are lots of points of view on Beacon Hill! I'm having coffee at Java Love on Friday morning at 7:45, if anyone wants to jaw about these matters. The Beacon Hill tunnel routing came about after Sound Transit failed to find a satisfactory way to build via Dearborn and Rainier Ave., the original planned corridor.

The first take on the BH tunnel did not have a station included, but after ST analyzed projected ridership data, they concluded it would have even higher ridership than the Rainier Valley stations, thus the decision to include a station. The NEXT cut had a station shell being built, but due to funding limitations, not finished until a later phase.

The community objected to not getting a functioning station, and with the high ridership projections ST revised the budget to include the station in the Initial Segment plan. And as noted already, that plan was adopted by the ST board in November 2001.

Zoning density actually had little or nothing to do with the station/no station decision by ST. Federal rules require transit agencies to NOT include speculative future development in making its ridership projections. The Feds look at “present trends continued”, not “what if” scenarions based on more intense zoning not yet adopted.

That said, my personal opinion is that higher density zoning is warranted near the BH Station. Even though this area underwent “station area planning” under Mayor Paul Schell, little change resulted from that process (which came AFTER the neighborhood had already spent years on neighborhood planning; neighbors were truly exhausted by planning processes). Schell’s station area plan left single-family zoning right across the street from the station!

I think there’s lots of potential for better planning/zoning in my Beacon Hill community, but we have to involve the community, folks with different points of view — and there are lots of points of view on Beacon Hill!

I’m having coffee at Java Love on Friday morning at 7:45, if anyone wants to jaw about these matters.

]]> by: schottsie http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3071 Wed, 18 Jun 2008 21:00:33 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3071 Roger and others: I apologize if my accusations were inaccurate. My understanding from those involved at the time was that Beacon Hill was included as a "provisional station" on the initial link in the alignment planning of the late 1990s--meaning that the engineering would not preclude the construction of a station at a later date--but that the zoning and land use at the time would not justify a station, and that one would not be built. At some point later, and my understanding that it was linked to the First Hill issue, but perhaps it was not, the station was added without the upzones that would provide the density that one would like to see at a station. History is highly revisionistic, however, and I have heard a variety of versions of this story since this post initially appeared. But even if there is disagreement about the history of the station, there is little disagreement over the current state of things: 1) a station and transit system that need to be supported by greater residential density, 2) a city and region that need to concentrate future growth along transit in order to survive (read: environmental, social and economic survival), 3) a neighborhood that wants public and private investment in infrastructure, amenities and good design. Seems to me that these three can all work together. So where is the win-win-win? Roger and others:
I apologize if my accusations were inaccurate. My understanding from those involved at the time was that Beacon Hill was included as a “provisional station” on the initial link in the alignment planning of the late 1990s–meaning that the engineering would not preclude the construction of a station at a later date–but that the zoning and land use at the time would not justify a station, and that one would not be built. At some point later, and my understanding that it was linked to the First Hill issue, but perhaps it was not, the station was added without the upzones that would provide the density that one would like to see at a station. History is highly revisionistic, however, and I have heard a variety of versions of this story since this post initially appeared. But even if there is disagreement about the history of the station, there is little disagreement over the current state of things:
1) a station and transit system that need to be supported by greater residential density,
2) a city and region that need to concentrate future growth along transit in order to survive (read: environmental, social and economic survival),
3) a neighborhood that wants public and private investment in infrastructure, amenities and good design.
Seems to me that these three can all work together. So where is the win-win-win?

]]> by: Roger Pence http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3070 Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:49:55 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3070 I've been asked to respond to some errors of fact in Schottsie's original post: "[Long story short: Beacon Hill wasn’t supposed to get a station because the neighborhood said no upzones, but when the First Hill station got nixed and suddenly there was money leftover, decision-makers apparently forgot that Beacon Hill wasn’t supposed to get a station without agreeing to some upzones…and they gave them the station anyway.]" The decision to include the Beacon Hill Station was made when the Sound Transit board adopted the Initial Segment plan for Link light rail in November 2001, long before the decision was reached to delete the First Hill Station. First Hill Station is a part of the University Link project, the line that runs north from Westlake Station to the University of Washington. Funds "saved" by not building the First Hill Station remain in the University Link project; none were transferred to the Initial Segment project or to the Beacon Hill Station. And further, as a Beacon Hill resident, I can assert that the neighborhood did NOT say no to upzones. At the conclusion of our Neighborhood Planning project, under Mayor Norm Rice, the City implemented our neighborhood-supported upzones. Roger Pence Community Outreach Coordinator Sound Transit Link light rail I’ve been asked to respond to some errors of fact in Schottsie’s original post: “[Long story short: Beacon Hill wasn’t supposed to get a station because the neighborhood said no upzones, but when the First Hill station got nixed and suddenly there was money leftover, decision-makers apparently forgot that Beacon Hill wasn’t supposed to get a station without agreeing to some upzones…and they gave them the station anyway.]”

The decision to include the Beacon Hill Station was made when the Sound Transit board adopted the Initial Segment plan for Link light rail in November 2001, long before the decision was reached to delete the First Hill Station. First Hill Station is a part of the University Link project, the line that runs north from Westlake Station to the University of Washington. Funds “saved” by not building the First Hill Station remain in the University Link project; none were transferred to the Initial Segment project or to the Beacon Hill Station.

And further, as a Beacon Hill resident, I can assert that the neighborhood did NOT say no to upzones. At the conclusion of our Neighborhood Planning project, under Mayor Norm Rice, the City implemented our neighborhood-supported upzones.

Roger Pence
Community Outreach Coordinator
Sound Transit Link light rail

]]> by: Sara N http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3037 Tue, 17 Jun 2008 02:37:59 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3037 Roger P: I'll be out of town on Friday, but would love to set up another time to chat. I am lobbying the city to reopen station area plans before light rail begins service. I was not here for the first go around, and would really like to get your perspective. Please send me an email and maybe we can set up another latte time. Thanks. sara@futurewise.org Roger P: I’ll be out of town on Friday, but would love to set up another time to chat. I am lobbying the city to reopen station area plans before light rail begins service. I was not here for the first go around, and would really like to get your perspective. Please send me an email and maybe we can set up another latte time. Thanks. sara@futurewise.org

]]> by: Roger P. http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3036 Tue, 17 Jun 2008 01:59:35 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3036 Wow. There's so much hash in this string, for good and ill, it's impossible to try and make sense (and provided needed corrections) of it all in one reply. I am a 19-year resident of Beacon Hill and was heavily involved in all phases of neighborhood planning in the 1990's. And I was equally involved in the process for locating the Link light rail line and the Beacon Hill station. And I happen to work for a certain regional transit authority.... If anybody wants to discuss these Beacon Hill issues, I'm going to be at Java Love at 7:45 a.m. this Friday. Stop by for a latte and some conversation. I'll have printed off and marked up this string, with my comments for discussion. Wow. There’s so much hash in this string, for good and ill, it’s impossible to try and make sense (and provided needed corrections) of it all in one reply. I am a 19-year resident of Beacon Hill and was heavily involved in all phases of neighborhood planning in the 1990’s. And I was equally involved in the process for locating the Link light rail line and the Beacon Hill station. And I happen to work for a certain regional transit authority….

If anybody wants to discuss these Beacon Hill issues, I’m going to be at Java Love at 7:45 a.m. this Friday. Stop by for a latte and some conversation. I’ll have printed off and marked up this string, with my comments for discussion.

]]> by: Marco http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3031 Mon, 16 Jun 2008 17:06:26 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/06/02/the-tod-challenge-how-do-we-make-a-circle-from-a-line-part-1-in-a-series/#comment-3031 "As your co-resident George Robertson very sensibly points out, the most useful transit upgrade for the Beacon Hill area at the present time would be an improved bus service." Eh? Looks to me like the Luddite "we hate rail" set is still stuck firmly in the last decade. Sabina: if bus service worked well for Beacon Hill, a light rail station never would have been situated up there. It's the poor speed and reliability inherent to buses which neccessitate light rail service. What I believe I'm reading here is an opposition to the effectiveness of light rail (as opposed to its shortcomings) from backwards-looking people. Why else would such bad information be fed into the information stream? Is there a reason people are so insistent in carrying grudges from a past era in Seattle? What is the point of this approach? George Robertson epitomizes the strange hope we can all live in the past: "It was so cheap to add the tunnel station that the City relented and added it." The Beacon Hill station was cheap? This is not a good way for Robertson to establish his credibility. "Never mind that if the line ever runs at the advertised capacity there will be no room on the train for anyone to board inbound at this last too-close stop before downtown in the AM peak hour." Mr. Robertson: did you base that opinion on facts, or a hunch, notion or feeling? "And never mind that the total ridership capacity of the whole light Rail line traversing the station is identical to the ridership today on the 36 bus route which serves the whole central ridge of Beacon Hill" Huh? I'm still convinced light rail opponents (and transit opponents overall) base their opposition on blatant mythology. One wonders whether the correct information would have steered somebody like Robertson down the opposite path. “As your co-resident George Robertson very sensibly points out, the most useful transit upgrade for the Beacon Hill area at the present time would be an improved bus service.”

Eh? Looks to me like the Luddite “we hate rail” set is still stuck firmly in the last decade.

Sabina: if bus service worked well for Beacon Hill, a light rail station never would have been situated up there. It’s the poor speed and reliability inherent to buses which neccessitate light rail service.

What I believe I’m reading here is an opposition to the effectiveness of light rail (as opposed to its shortcomings) from backwards-looking people. Why else would such bad information be fed into the information stream?

Is there a reason people are so insistent in carrying grudges from a past era in Seattle? What is the point of this approach?

George Robertson epitomizes the strange hope we can all live in the past:

“It was so cheap to add the tunnel station that the City relented and added it.”

The Beacon Hill station was cheap? This is not a good way for Robertson to establish his credibility.

“Never mind that if the line ever runs at the advertised capacity there will be no room on the train for anyone to board inbound at this last too-close stop before downtown in the AM peak hour.”

Mr. Robertson: did you base that opinion on facts, or a hunch, notion or feeling?

“And never mind that the total ridership capacity of the whole light Rail line traversing the station is identical to the ridership today on the 36 bus route which serves the whole central ridge of Beacon Hill”

Huh? I’m still convinced light rail opponents (and transit opponents overall) base their opposition on blatant mythology. One wonders whether the correct information would have steered somebody like Robertson down the opposite path.

]]>