The Moronorail has survived the recall vote. Boy did I call that one wrong. I was certain that I-83 would pass by a large margin. Earlier this year when I was collecting signatures to put I-83 on the ballot I encountered broad and deep contempt for the Monorail. One guy grabbed for my petition clipboard and cheered "Give me that. I hate the f*cking Monorail".
Of course most people don't want to pay for and build the Moronorail. But take a look at the arguments that I-83 opponents made. They didn't argue in favor of the Monorail, they argued against the legitimacy of I-83. The "Build the Monorail" campaign said that I-83 Is An Illegal Initiative
When considering a vote for I-83, voters should be sure they are supporting an initiative that is actually legal and will be implemented if approved. As we've learned from people like Tim Eyman, any proposal that gains enough signatures can make a ballot. However, that does not mean that the proposal is legal under state law. Illegal initiatives only waste government tax dollars by creating lengthy court battles that end up with the rejection of the proposal.
The Seattle Times agreed that the process was faulty :
in the end, the monorail-recall campaign took an insincere route. If this is what voters want, call a recall a recall and follow the rules.The P-I concurredIt is easy to say the monorail project is not what we bargained for, but in fairness, neither is the recall attempt. It is a shortcut and the wrong way to express anger at the monorail. Vote no on I-83.
Insufficient evidence exists for voters to make an informed decision.Fair enough. So if the oppposition to I-83 was not an argument for the Monorail, but merely against the specific initiative to stop the Monorail, then the defeat of I-83 could not have been an affirmation of the Monorail, it was merely the agreement with the argument that I-83 was the "wrong way to express anger" at the Moronorail.Seattle voters have the right to re-examine the project if it's shown that the right system can't be built for the allotted funds. If so, it should be a reasoned, educated re-evaluation, not a "revote" of the original question.
You know there will be more controversy as more information comes out about the Monorail -- the city financial review, the details in the still secret Cascadia bid. We have too many other more pressing transportation needs in this City to also pay for an amusement park train. I stick with my prediction that the Moronorail will not be built in our lifetime.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at November 03, 2004 09:04 PM | Email ThisA Waterfront route is better than 2nd Avenue. With the Alaskan Way Viaduct gone there are many advantages there: replace lost views; plenty room for stanchions and stations; complimentary construction scheduling; best access to arenas, ferries, waterfront, Pioneer Square, Pike Place Market.
Seattle needs better E/W bus service between the Waterfront and Capitol/First Hills; not duplicative N/S transit along 1st/3rd corridor. Waterfront Monorail initiates a 'grid system' for the whole downtown. Tired of uphill trudgery?
Route the monorail along I-99, above Battery, through Denny Triangle and skirt Lake Union, then up Dexter for connections to Upper Queen Anne and Aurora, then down to serve Fremont but stay on Westlake to SPU, then tunnel under the shipping canal and into Ballard. This route serves MANY more neighborhoods and growing districts and preserves the existig monorail.
A proposal titled, "The Seattle Circulator Plan" combines this Waterfront Route with a complimentary expansion of the exiting monorail. This "Circulator Monorail" (Blueline) adds ONLY 4 miles of low-impact, low-cost 'single-track' to circle Seattle Center on the north, and circle downtown, First and Capitol Hills on the south. It runs ONLY 4 trains at 5 MINUTE intervals to 10 high-demand destingations: Westlake Mall, Downtown Library, Harborview, Seattle University-Swedish Hospital, City College, Convention Place Station, and 4 stations for Seattle Center, one, a maintenance facility 'atop' Mercer parking garage. Its cost estimated at $500 million.
The Circulator Monorail was first proposed and submitted in 2000 and subsequently many times to agency and organization deaf ears with contrary agendas. Seattle dinkers with a poorly designed Greenline Monorail and blacklisted a low-cost Circulator Monoral. Go figure.
Picture Sound Transit trying to do exactly the same route the Monorail is taking. (Which is on the 'full plan' for light rail.)
It isn't the monorail so much as the _only_ way to put a stake into Sound Transit's 'full light rail plan'.
I recognize you fully expect the monorail to go drastically over budget - but please compare 14 miles of monorail with two water crossings through the center of downtown to 14 miles of light rail with zero water crossings and more than 5x the operational expenses. Now remember that the next leg of Sound Transit to the U District is planned to be a tunnel and start adding zeros to the price.
_If_ the monorail is on track and less than, say 50% over budget, which of these two things would you want _NEXT_.
1) 2.4 Billion extension of light rail through Capital Hill to the Ave. (Not Northgate, that's more)
2) $800 million extension of the monorail to Northgate then south to Capitol Hill. (Crown hill-to-NG = 3 miles, NG-to-water = 3 miles depending on choice of crossing.)
The best routes are vital to serve the most riders, and to influence the most development for future riders. Why pick the less productive routes? For example:
The light rail plan makes the same error of route selection in bypassing South Center, the only major destination along the southern route; a destination more important than the airport. Thousands ride transit daily to South Center whose major development plans predict greater demand for transit that justify a direct rail route. Without South Center, the trains will run mostly empty southbound, mostly empty both directions most of the time. Only during rush hours will Link trains reach capacity or more likely overwhelmned in the commute direction. Fearful of competition, downtown Seattle retailers said no to the Direct Route through South Center. Boeing said no. Renton said no and wants a freeway instead. Tukwila fought valiantly for the Direct Route but were overwhelmned by the powerful who derive income from selling, financing, insuring, advertizing, maintaining, etc etc, automobiles, and do not want transit built to higher standards. Yeah, you heard me.
Posted by: Art Lewellan on November 5, 2004 01:05 PMhttp://www.monorailrecoil.tk
You don't understand that FEUDAL governance can never be defeated. It's the next best thing to divine right of kings.
Get over your 18th century obsession with the obsolete "democratic Republic" - that oppressive Eurotrash ideal is over.
Wise, educated, egalitarian, unelected leaders know what's best for your familes - pay the tax and shut up! And when SMP goes over budget, pay that too!
Posted by: Monomaniacal Hegemonist on November 15, 2004 01:09 PM