Photo by Oran Viriyincy.

After eliminating paper transfers in favor of ORCA last October, Kitsap Transit commissioners voted yesterday to allow for limited paper transfers through the end of the year.

The resolution places “paper transfers back on our vehicles until the end of the year,” said Laurie Talbert, public information coordinator for Kitsap Transit. “It is a limited transfer, because unlike an ORCA transfer which is valid for two hours in any direction at any location and between regional agencies, our paper transfer is limited to the next connecting Kitsap Transit bus or foot ferry and is valid only at our transfer centers.”

ORCA is a regional transit pass that automatically handles transfers, but it costs $5 to purchase a card, and that had some social advocacy groups questioning the equity of requiring cards to handle transfers.

The issue was put in front of commissioners “after input from social service agencies in our area that provide bus fare to their low income clients  “They have requested additional time to help their low income clients convert to the ORCA card.” In Kitsap County, cards are only available at a Ferry terminal, one Safeway store, and online. Other Safeway stores will begin to carry the cards later this year, according to the Kitsap Sun.

“Kitsap Transit offers a low income fare, but must obtain their initial ORCA card in person at our Customer Service Office,” Talbert explained to us. “The logistics of getting each of their clients to our office has been difficult and the elimination of our paper transfers and the implementation of the $5 card fee have made that trip to our office more costly for the agencies. The temporary return of our transfers will cut their cost to convert the remainder of their clients to ORCA.”

The lessons of Kitsap Transit will be instructive as other agencies begin to eliminate paper transfers. Thanks to reader Mike Fisher for the tip.

We’re hearing from local news outlets that a suspicious package on the BNSF mainline is holding up South Sounder trains.  From Chuck Taylor’s twitter, it appears that Southline northbound (reverse-peak) trains are being halted near Boeing Field and there are delays up to 35 minutes.  We’ll let you know when service resumes.

[Update 6:06pm:] According to Sound Transit, a second suspicious package has been discovered, prolonging delays out of Seattle.  Per an earlier mistake, it appears that all Southline trains are being affected, not just reverse-peak.

[Update 6:20pm:] The tracks are clear and all service has resumed.

Cycle Zone Analysis (top) vs. Bikeability Analysis (bottom)

In December 2008 the City of Portland and Alta Planning released an analysis they called a “Cycle Zone Analysis” (top two maps above). Although somewhat qualitative it identify the strengths and weaknesses of bicycling in different zone of the city. Myself and many other professions were very excited about this because it helped to fill a gap in non-motorized transportation planning and analysis.

Most non-motorized transportation planning is based on citizen input through needs analysis. Essentially someone will say “there is a need here”, like lack of sidewalk, or lots of bicyclist use this road, etc. This is an extremely important part of transportation planning, after all if you don’t know what is wrong how can you solve it. But stopping there, as many plans do, leaves you with distinct problems. First you aren’t able to easily compare how important a project is. This is especially important when identified projects far outstrips funds, sound familiar? Also this make it hard to quantify or understand from a long range planning perspective what your strengths and weaknesses are, and in turn how to best build off your strengths and mitigate your weaknesses.

More after the jump…

(more…)

The Bellevue City Council voted 4-3 tonight to approve a term sheet that has agreed to offer up to $150 million in funding toward a downtown tunnel alignment with Sound Transit. The agency cannot afford the C9T alignment on its own and has said the city must provide funding if it wants a tunnel alignment. The $150 million is the most concrete step forward we’ve seen thus far on funding the tunnel alignment.

Without approval of the term sheet (pdf), the city would have committed nothing to a downtown light rail tunnel. That would have put the Sound Transit Board in a bind, and when it selected its preferred East Link alignment it would have been unlikely to move forward on the tunnel. While the Bellevue City Council overwhelmingly favors that alignment, during a contentious and late night meeting it seemed unwilling to move forward on the term sheet.

The C9T alignment.

But an unexpected “yes” vote from Mayor Davidson put a narrow majority in favor of moving forward with the term sheet. The Sound Transit board will likely move forward with studying both the C9T and C11A alignments for downtown. The C11A at-grade alignment is unpopular on the council because it would run light rail on city streets, but that alignment is within the current East Link budget.

Davidson admitted after the vote to putting out “feelers” and hints that he would vote no. He seemed to struggle with his yes vote.

Some on the council seemed anxious to tie the term sheet for the downtown segment to the B segment south of downtown, with some implying their “no” vote was a statement to Sound Transit that the board must support a B7 alignment which isn’t favored regionally because of its ridership and environmental impacts. Mayor Davidson had proposed an amendment that would tie the approval of the term sheet to early design on B7 moving forward, but that amendment failed because the city would have had to pay for the study. Some vocal communities in Bellevue have demanded that light rail run far away from their homes and a majority on the council support B7. That alignment does not serve the South Bellevue Park & Ride and would be costlier to connect to the downtown segment, and the Sound Transit board is unlikely to move B7 forward.

Some council members said that a week was not enough time to study the term sheet that was negotiated between city staff and Sound Transit staff. Some also argued that the Sound Transit Board will recognize the city council’s commitment to a tunnel even without a formal term sheet moving negotiations forward.

With these negative arguments, some councilmembers seemed resigned to a losing vote. Councilmember Balducci had asked the council just to get the vote over with since she could see how the “winds are shifting,” just minutes before she unexpectedly prevailed in the majority.

City staff recommended the council adopt the term sheet. The term sheet is not binding and a final alignment will not be selected until Spring 2011 when East Link’s environmental impact statement is finalized.

11:30pm: Shocker! The council approves the term sheet. See the above blog post.

11:08pm: The city council seems likely to reject the term sheet.

10:45pm: Davidson’s amendment failed. The underlying term sheet is may not pass tonight, which would mean that the Sound Transit Board may not move forward on studying C9T, meaning that Sound Transit may move forward on just an at-grade alignment (C11A) that is unpopular in Bellevue but fits within the East Link budget with no city contribution.

10:36pm: Davidson’s “compromise” measure isn’t finding popular support for his motion, meaning the underlying term sheet may not pass this evening. The term sheet is important because it clears the way for Bellevue city staff to offer $150mn funding for the tunnel. Without a financial commitment like that — which is still unbinding, but rather an advance in negotiations — the Sound Transit Board is unlikely to move forward on the studying C9T alignment when it selects its preferred East Link alignment.

9:46pm: Mayor Davidson puts forward a motion that has the city council approve the term sheet, but only if B7 is carried through preliminary engineering. However, the city would pay for that preliminary engineering which would cost about $2.2 million. This is a compromise plan from Davidson, since before now it looked like the council was going to vote down the term sheet. It’s a gambit to move B7 — a plan unpopular with the ST board — forward, along with B2M.

9:24pm: City staff is presenting a term sheet to the city council. City staff support the term sheet, which stipulates a framework to work with Sound Transit to work together on the alignment and fund the C9T tunnel alignment and other sections of East Link within Bellevue. It would direct Bellevue city staff to present alternative options be unbinding, with a final agreement with Sound Transit on the segment B and C alignments to be decided in Spring 2011. The term sheet would mostly describe a framework for continuing future negotiations.

Updated at 8:10pm: There is a live stream of the meeting online. The East Link vote is item 11a on the agenda (pdf), so the meeting may run very late.

We reported last week that Bellevue intends to support the C9T tunnel alignment through downtown. The Bellevue City Council will be voting tonight on a measure favoring the alignment (pdf) during a meeting that starts at 8pm, and promising $150mn in city contributions to the tunnel. The vote would direct the city staff to create a term sheet with Sound Transit regarding the C9T alignment.

However, we’ve learned to take nothing for granted when it comes to East Link. There is no assurance that the term sheet will actually pass the council. We’ll let you know what happens tonight.

Launched this morning, the Streets for All Seattle campaign aims to raise some $30 million annually from the City Council to help fund the bicycle and pedestrian master plans, as well as make transit infrastructure improvements.

I’ve been involved with this behind the scenes, and the way it’s shaping up looks fantastic. Improving sidewalks, adding dedicated and shared bicycle infrastructure, and potentially taking the next steps toward West Seattle to Ballard light rail are in the mix – although it’ll be up to the city council to determine exactly how they want to apportion funds.

In the next few weeks and months, we’ll have an opportunity to push our Council to make progressive, green transportation investments. Keep an eye on that site and here on the blog, and as there’s more news, we’ll have it.

Proposed Bike-Share Phases

The Bike-Share Studio in the UW College of the Built Environment released a feasibility report commissioned by SDOT. It’s a very good starting point for any future bike-share proposal and does a excellent job of outlining the possibilities but also limitations and obstacles that a bike-share system will have to overcome, especially with relation to policy. Publicola’s Josh Cohen has a good post on it so won’t spend time rewriting what he already wrote. I have included a few comments and thoughts that came to mind after reading the report.

More after the jump

(more…)

Pierce Transit C40LF. Photo by Atomic Taco.

As Pierce Transit is considering deep service cuts, some cities have begun to rebel saying that if cuts are made then their taxes will be used to fund little or no local bus service. The Tacoma News Tribute reports that five cities are looking are leaving Piece Transit.

Representatives from Bonney Lake, Buckley, Orting, Steilacoom and DuPont met last week to discuss the possibility of “de-annexing” from Pierce Transit.

So far the group is just researching its options, officials said. But they agree their residents shouldn’t pay for service they don’t receive.

Tacoma Tomorrow has two excellent posts covering the issue in detail. First, Chris Karnes has a post covering the amount of revenue from the various cities that goes to Pierce Transit. The five suburbs raised about $3.1 million in 2009. The second post, by Evan Siroky, covers the effects of upcoming service cuts on the individual cities which certainly belies this action. All of the cities would have reduced service in the future, except Orting, which has no service at all right now.

According to the TNT article, the cities don’t yet know of a legal solution to actually leave Pierce Transit, so it’s likely this story is being floated to implore the agency to target its cuts toward other cities and carve out service for the suburbs in question. As we’ve noted in the past, Pierce Transit only levies a 0.6% sales tax, with the state maximum being 0.9%. Both Community Transit and King County Metro levy the full 0.9%, so Piece Transit has some capacity to raise additional revenue. However, even a plan from Pierce Transit assuming new funding would cut service for these suburbs.

One note: the cuts in local bus service could be a pain for these municipalities, but a county-wide bus system is primarily in existence to reduce congestion and increase mobility — on a limited budget — for a county as a whole, and local interests may sometimes conflict with that mission.

By Mike Bjork

Some of you may have recently heard about the Seattle-Puget Sound area Partners in Preservation initiative, where 25 local landmarks will vie for grant money through your votes.  It just so happens that King Street Station is one of the finalists.  The station is currently undergoing a restoration with funds from the 2006 Bridging the Gap levy.  However, those of us familiar with the restoration work know that the apportioned funds are still not enough.

From the SDOT Blog:

King Street Station is fortunate to be a part of this year’s program, seeking funding for restoration of the grand staircase leading from the Jackson Street Plaza to the lower main waiting room of the station. This funding would restore the granite and marble stairs and brass decorative features.

Voting requires registration of a new profile; anyone can cast a vote once a day until May 12, 2010.  The winner will receive $1 million in preservation grants.  King Street Station is a vital civic component to the city that will be ever more important as we bring better and faster passenger rail to America.  Start voting now.

Yesterday, we covered a letter that the Seattle City Council sent to the state on SR 520 that included some reasonable recommendations, and echoed some of the arguments we’ve made recently. It points out that pontoons for light rail could be added later and aren’t an immediate concern, as I argued last week. It says that bus service is probably a more “flexible and effective form” of transit than light rail for this corridor, as Ben made the case. And the letter softly supported the concerns of McGinn’s report regarding a gap in the eastbound and westbound spans through the arboretum, which might be necessary to build light rail in the future; Martin would support that if the cost were right.

But the letter is clearly a rebuke of the Mayor’s light rail report and McGinn’s lobbying to delay construction of the bridge until a transit plan, including rail, is fully complete. McGinn hasn’t just failed to get his city’s council on board, though, he has also failed to convince many strong transit advocates of his case. Case in point: not a single blogger from this site is in agreement with the mayor, even though the phrase “seattle transit” is literally our name.

One can’t help but wonder what this use of political capital is getting McGinn (besides possibly a gap in the Foster bridge). Just as Mayor Nickels developed a reputation of not being able to work with the state and present a unified Seattle coalition, McGinn is falling into the same trap. On the other hand, McGinn has made the council’s position seem moderate and the state may be willing to cut them a better deal. And McGinn’s incredible and authentic zeal for transit is exactly what we need next year, when he plans present a ballot measure expanding rail in the city.

A word of caution for the town’s mayor, though: when you’re coming late to a battle, like the deep-bore tunnel and the 520 project, we can’t totally blame you for lacking a built-in constituency and nibbling at the edges of a project to destruct it. But for a rail plan that will be your own doing, it’d be smart to put the lie to the perception of “six-shooter McGinn” and get something solid in front of people, long before election day.

Sound Transit is asking visitors to their website to fill out a short two-minute survey. We’ve brainstormed ideas on improving ST’s website back in October. It wouldn’t hurt to fill out the survey and let them know what you want to see improved.

A couple of grad students are trying to help OneBusAway systematically collect ideas for further extensions and prioritize those changes. To that end, they’ve created a short survey not about OBA features themselves, but about how people would like to give feedback to OBA.

WSDOT

PubliCola reports on a letter (text here) the Seattle City Council sent to WSDOT about modifications to the west side of the 520 bridge. It’s worth going into in some detail, as a pretty good example of what can be achieved to improve transit without sending WSDOT back to the drawing board.

Crucially, the Council asserts that the proposed modifications fit within the $4.65 billion budget for the project and require no additional EIS, preventing delays. I’m not deeply concerned about avoiding delays for their own sake, but am eager to avoid pouring substantial additional resources into marginal transit improvements.

There are about a dozen transit-related recommendations, most of which are great; some are suboptimal but hardly terrible. More after the jump.

(more…)

The First Hill Streetcar alignment preferred by the Capitol Hill Community Council, including an extension north to Aloha.

The Seattle City Council is set to vote on a resolution that would endorse the idea of extending the First Hill streetcar north to Aloha. According to jseattle of Capitol Hill Seattle Blog, Ethan Malone said during a meeting of the Capitol Hill Community Council last evening that the draft language allowing the city to move forward with the streetcar project will allow Seattle’s Department of Transportation to attempt to secure funding for the extension.

An extension north to Aloha could boost ridership on the First Hill streetcar and Link light rail, supporters argue. The First Hill Streetcar that went before voters on the 2007 Roads & Transit measure terminated at Aloha, but the scaled back 2008 ST2 measure scaled back funding for the streetcar and put the responsibility for construction on SDOT, who promised it could build the line cheaper. The catch is that SDOT is also responsible for cost overruns.

People who have seen the city council’s draft resolution tell us that the city is not yet setting aside funding for a streetcar extension, but instead simply authorizing SDOT to search for funding. The department would be free to begin discussions with Sound Transit on a way to get help funding preliminary engineering for the extension. SDOT could also come back to the city council itself and ask for funding. As reported on Monday, funding that preliminary engineering would make the extension “shovel-ready” and open it up to federal funding, like so-called small starts or TIGER-like merit-based funding. Having the project shovel-ready could also allow for it to be included in Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn’s rail expansion measure he plans to bring before local voters next year.

More on the First Hill Streetcar extension after the jump…

(more…)

If you live in Whatcom County or know someone who does, remind them to register to vote in the April 27th Whatcom Transit special election, which would allow a sales tax increase to avoid service cuts.

Monday, April 19th is the last day to register.  At this late date, registration can only be done in person at the Auditor’s office: 311 Grand Ave. , Suite 103, Bellingham, WA; Monday-Friday, 8:30 AM – 4:30 PM.