Comments on: News Roundup: 42 Days

By: Mike Orr

Mike Orr — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 19:11:32 +0000

I said 71/72/73 express would be eliminated. The evening/Sunday local service would have to remain unless Metro starts running the 70 full time. Which maybe it would in a grand realignment. It confuses people to have different routes stopping on the same street at different times. The only reason it happens this way now is because of tradition. When there wasn’t a route 70, 71/72/73/74 used to have both local and express service during the day.

Also, there has been talk of a streetcar which would presumably replace the 70.

As an aside, Eastlake has more local service than almost anywhere in the city, and much higher than its density would suggest. You can get a bus every fifteen minutes from 6am to 2:15am, which you can’t do on higher-traffic Broadway, 45th, or Rainier Beach.

Although as I said above, that should be the goal throughout the system, and appears to be Metro’s long-term plan. It would also bring Seattle’s bus coverage up to Chicago’s, which would increase ridership.

By: Mike Orr

Mike Orr — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 18:57:09 +0000

@Jason: “Metro is keeping local bus service at 15-minute headways on MLK with route 8.”

I was going to add something similar myself. Metro’s long-term goal is to achieve 15-minute service throughout the system on the core routes. That would eliminate the discussion of reducing service on the 43 and 49 after Link opens. But there’s no money for it yet.

You’re right, the changing patterns of Link may increase use of the 43 as well as decrease it.

By: Mike Orr

Mike Orr — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 18:50:25 +0000

@Oran: Through-routing the north half of the 71/72/73.

Yes, that would make sense. Most of those streets are small enough that they don’t generate much traffic backup. A 72/73 joinup sounds the most likely since they’re close to each other.

Joining the 30 or 75 doesn’t sound likely because those routes are already very long, and the 30 is already centered at the U-district.

By: octopus

octopus — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 16:06:38 +0000

mmm. Streetcar? What are the current plans?

By: octopus

octopus — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 16:05:31 +0000

Funny about Mercer Hall. In the early ’90s when I was at UW, they had mothballed it because of such low enrollment ( ah, the joys of being an Gen Xer)

By: EvergreenRailfan

EvergreenRailfan — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 05:15:30 +0000

Southern Pacific would not let Dome Cars run on Donner Pass, built their own single-level versions, and when the California Zephyr had to detour when the Feather River Canyon was washed out, Western Pacific was told they could not sell seats in the Dome, because of safety concerns in the snowsheds on Donner Pass. In the Amtrak-era, until the Superliner came, the then-San Francisco Zephyr had to use ex-B&O Dome cars because of their lower-profiles.

By: Chris Stefan

Chris Stefan — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 01:12:51 +0000

Or maybe something with the 66 though I hope not. That route loses enough time at the limited stops along Eastlake (though the FHCRC is a very popular stop during the day M-F in both directions).

By: Chris Stefan

Chris Stefan — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 01:09:40 +0000

Similarly paratransit could address the issue of not having front-door service to the VA Hospital. I don’t see why Metro has to throw away a perfectly good service plan because the VA put the hospital entrance at the furthest possible point from the surrounding arterials.

By: Lloyd

Lloyd — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 15:29:53 +0000

Don’t get me wrong – I’m a fan of the Superliners and their efficiency and utility. However, I’ve read just a little snippet twice in the last couple of months (do not recall where) that the FRA is questioning whether to continue authorizing them – some “safety” issue I am sure, but with them, it can never be too soon to start planning an alternative. As Everfan says, those 1950s dome cars were superb; we’ll never see anything like them again. A safety case for them could never be made to the FRA these days.

By: EvergreenRailfan

EvergreenRailfan — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 05:10:13 +0000

When I rode the Empire Builder to Malta, Montana, the platform was so short, the engineer had to make two stops, one for sleeper, one for coach. No checked baggage though, it’s an un-staffed depot. To the west in Shelby and Havre, it was different, the platforms were longer. One was the crew change point, the other a service stop. The compromise I would like to see to get more of the wraparound windows, would kind of bring back the dome coach. On the GN Empire Builder, there were 3 or 4 domes, the big one that was the lounge car, and a couple Dome Coaches. On the North Coast Limited, they had dome sleepers, but their were not bunks in the dome, just seating for the sleeper passengers during the day.

By: Martin H. Duke

Martin H. Duke — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 05:09:40 +0000

Sam,

They just invoke the image of the elderly client who can’t walk more than a block without difficulty. It’s a powerful image.

Of course, given that we have a paratransit system one wonders why we need to devote thousands of bus service hours to this problem, but I think I’m preaching to the choir here.

By: ericn

ericn — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 04:15:57 +0000

Probably all-day service on the 70, or perhaps by that time the SLU Streetcar will be extended to the U District and replace the 70.

By: SR Das

SR Das — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 03:56:16 +0000

What about the 71/72/73 LOCAL? I mean, people on Fairview and Eastlake need to get to Downtown and the U District, and route 70 only operates Weekdays from 6am-8pm and Saturday from 9am-7pm. What would the local 70-series be replaced by?

By: serial catowner

serial catowner — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 22:24:22 +0000

Amtrak uses the single level cars for east coast routes with limited clearance.

Why anyone would want single level cars for west coast routes is totally beyond me, especially considering that Domeliners were actually two-level with a club segment under the dome floor. I’ve seen Amtrak pulling 10-11 car trains and if those were single level the platform length would almost double- that would be quite a little walk! There are also siding lengths to consider.

Yes, it would be awful nice if there were more observation cars, and more diners, but you start eating up your seating pretty fast with these things. Then you get into a crunch situation where to get more seats in a car you are cutting down the legroom- just look at where the airlines have gone with this, and you start to realize why some European lines bring your meal to your seat.

Generally speaking, if you can get a hundred paid fares into an 80-foot car, you’re doing pretty good, but that car weighs about 50 tons. So it’s always a matter of compromises.

By: Ben Schiendelman

Ben Schiendelman — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 20:06:13 +0000

It’s not a static number of people. Existing services often see higher ridership when rail starts because the rail brings more people to transit who wouldn’t otherwise have ridden. An MLK Way resident might work at Group Health on 15th and transfer to do that at Capitol Hill, for instance, but didn’t like the bus options before.

By: Lloyd

Lloyd — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 03:38:57 +0000

THAT was interesting and entertaining. Makes some the antics in Olympia and the other Washington look tame.

By: Sam

Sam — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 02:50:38 +0000

The ACRS’ building is on MLK and Walden, if I’m not mistaken. And isn’t that 2 blocks from Rainier, where the 7 runs? Why do they specifically need the route 42 to get to downtown, when they could take the 7?

By: ericn

ericn — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 02:30:50 +0000

UW will be redeveloping that area in the next few years, adding in new dorms and student apartments. I also hear they’ll be tearing down Mercer Hall and replacing it with something worth living in.

Also, I remember reading somewhere that King County had marked the waterfront by West Campus as an alternate stop location for the Kirkland-UW water taxi (as opposed to the Husky Stadium waterfront). This would be worse for a Link transfer, but until 2016 would be a decent stop.

By: joshuadf

joshuadf — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 00:01:43 +0000

Very true… West Campus is the most underutilized land in the city! Awesome location right by the water grabbed by UW as “urban renewal” in the 70s and almost nothing there. Bleh.

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 23:56:37 +0000

This series in The Tyee finished this week:

Derailed: How BC’s Chance for High-Speed Rail Jumped the Tracks
http://thetyee.ca/Series/2009/05/27/Derailed/