Sounders fans line up to ride Link. Photo by Oran.

Light rail ridership was up 11% in April compared to March.  The average April weekday saw 20,129 boardings, according to Sound Transit. April’s numbers are Link’s strongest performance so far.

There were 18,094 boardings on the average weekday in March and 16,741 in February. This month’s raw data is hosted locally (pdf).

Link ridership has had an upward trend is recent months, but as I noted last month even these current numbers are below ST’s earlier projections:

The 2010 Service Implementation Plan (pdf) from Sound Transit predicted that ridership would average 26,600 across the year, a figure that is unlikely to be met. Sources at Sound Transit have told us those estimates do not reflect the lower-than-planned train frequencies and the fact that fares are charged in the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel, and do not account for the deep recession. It’s unknown if the 2011 Service Implementation Plan will continue to use unreliable estimates.

And though these large percentage jumps are nice to see, we should keep in mind that they may not keep up with seasonal changes in demand over the rest of the year.

Metro

There’s a lot of dissatisfaction out there with the expected overall quality of RapidRide.  While there are certainly valid criticisms of the system, as with any other, it’s important to remember that RapidRide is a step forward in our region’s transportation infrastructure.

The first and most obvious observation is that RapidRide is not Link, nor does it approach Link’s service level.  The grand total of $87m is being spent on various permanent capital improvements to roadways and stations for all six lines, in addition to $128m for buses that should last a bit over 12 years.  Some of this was covered by the Feds, and RapidRide leverages city-funded road improvements.  To bring headways up to RapidRide standards, Metro has added or will add 100,000 service hours, or about $12.5m in annual costs.  That’s a fraction of the $67m Metro takes in thanks to the Transit Now tax increase, most of which went to conventional bus service.  The $87m would have paid for less than a half-mile of Central Link, which is not a value judgment on either system. It is not a substitute for Link, nor is it intended to be one.  More after the jump.

(more…)

"...in Order to form a more perfect Union..."

Remember when Senator Patty Murray passed an amendment that let King County Metro provide its popular Mariners bus service? Bad news. The Seattle PI reports that her amendment was ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge in DC yesterday after private charter bus operators sued.

“Right now, we are not sure just how the recent federal judge’s ruling will affect the Metro to the Mariners Special Service,” Rebecca Hale of the Mariners said. “We hope to know within a few days whether the service will be canceled.  When we receive that notification, we will post it on our website and will reach out to our fans with that information.”

The opinion says that Murray’s amendment violated the First and Fifth Amendments. Wait, the First Amendment right to free speech? Says the opinion: Murray’s amendment “prevents the FTA from spending money to review, investigate, or hear complaints against [Metro],” and this “this constitutes a significant burden on [private charter bus operators'] First Amendment right to petition.”

Fifth Amendment rights were violated because Murray’s amendment protected only King County Metro and no other public transit operators in the country, the opinion says. The Fifth Amendment provides due process protections and requires equal protection under the law — equal protection that means “similarly situated” entities should be treated equally under the law. Murray’s amendment gave no remedy for private bus operators who could provide even lower-cost service than Metro, which could undermine the cost claim that she argued with in her press release, says the court:

For instance, it seems plausible that expanding the grounds for exemptions to the Charter Rule where private charter service has been shown to be inadequate or too costly would have an effect similar to, if not greater than the Murray Amendment with respect to the problems identified by defendants, without burdening plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights. Moreover, the Amendment itself merely states that the FTA may not use funds to investigate possible Charter Rule violations by one publicly-subsidized entity, not that this entity is required to provide lower prices and more convenient service for the public.

Murray’s amendment curtailed a Bush-era policy that forbade public transit agencies from providing charter service when any private charter operator was willing to take up the task, regardless of the cost difference to sports fans. An improvement to this regulation could be to waive the requirement when a private charter is uncompetitive, and that would take new legislation. In either case, Metro’s service was fully funded by the Mariners and didn’t require taxpayer subsidies, a spokeswoman told the PI.

The suit was launched against the Federal Transit Administration, it’s unknown if the government will appeal the decision.

Tom Rasmussen

The effort to establish stronger Council oversight over the revision to Seattle’s Transit Master Plan has passed out of the transportation committee. What’s perplexing is committee chair Tom Rasmussen’s comment about light rail:

Rasmussen expressed surprise that McGinn wanted light rail to be in the plan. “Typically, light rail is something that occurs regionally rather than city by city,” Rasmussen said. “I wonder if the Bridging the Gap Oversight Committee would want that money to go to light rail planning” rather than other modes of transit like electric trolleys, streetcars, and buses.

Rasmussen is obviously entitled to be skeptical of city-funded light rail, even though we would strongly disagree.  But how could he possibly find this surprising?  McGinn’s promise to send light rail to the ballot was a prominent event in the general election; less famously, Council President Richard Conlin said favorable things about the plan shortly after the election.

Combined with his prominent role in the pro-tunnel faction and wobbly response to the Nickerson road diet, Rasmussen is not scoring many points with those interested in more and better alternatives to driving.

Also read Frank on this subject.

"Link LRV Under Construction", posted by Gordon Werner

• Letter praises USDOT’s new bike/ped focus, signed by none other than Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, the only Washington rep to do so. Huh.
• If this level of noise sensitivity was present sixty years ago, we would never have built freeways, and we would have been better off for it.  But now, it’s simply serving to entrench freeway dominance.
• Capitol Hill mulls over their station area. The quotes suggest a neighborhood more open to change than most.
• The Central District News trying to bargain to keep trolleybuses.
• Lousy pedestrian crossing at Beacon Hill Station.
• McGinn proposes paying for waterfront with property, parking, LID taxes.
• Tom Rasmussen denies he opposes the Nickerson road diet. 36th District legislators lukewarm, at best.  In the end, the road diet will happen in July.
• WTA unveils different plans to cut service, after the failure of their tax measure.
• A sense of urgency for Tacoma Streetcar plans.
• Fewer teenagers learning to drive.
• Commercial parking around rail stations?
• Sen. Patty Murray continues to sing the praises of Bel-Red redevelopment plans.
• A lawsuit claims Seattle’s seismic retrofits are unsound.
• Commute subsidy company holds sweepstakes to get more people on employer transit benefit plans.
• Vancouver’s Translink to introduce smart cards, turnstiles; Canada Line already near capacity.
• Feds using general fund to top off highway trust fund; USDOT wants public input on criteria for transit grants.
• Raise the gas tax now.

This is an open thread.

F Line (Metro)

Metro finally released maps for RapidRide E (Aurora) and F (Burien/Renton), to begin service in 2013.

If you’re curious about the difference between a “station stop” and “other stop”, check out this report.  Metro also has a much improved website outlining RapidRide’s amenities.

wikipedia

There’s been a lot of discussion of Doug Macdonald’s Crosscut piece that points to abnormally high wage levels among some Metro drivers:

Experienced drivers at the top of the wage scale in 2009 made $28.47 an hour, topping all but two cities on a list of 29 around the country — and including six other systems in Washington state. Nationally, only Boston and San Jose were higher than Metro. New York and San Francisco were lower. Community Transit (Snohomish County), Pierce Transit, Intercity Transit (Thurston County), C-Trans (Clark County), Spokane Transit, and Whatcom Transit (Bellingham) were lower by 8 percent to 25 percent.

Looking solely at the top of the wage scale raises more interesting questions than it answers.  Why not average pay?  Are Metro’s drivers unusually old?  Has the union simply decided to lavishly compensate experienced drivers at the expense of new and part-time ones?  And of course, the report doesn’t discuss overtime pay and benefits at all.  We’re left with a startlingly incomplete picture of the wage situation.  Metro was not able to provide me with the comparative data that would have answered some of these questions.

This blog isn’t about “living wages” or union solidarity or anything like that, and it’s certainly in the interest of transit riders to get as much service as possible for any given amount of revenue.  Regardless of how “fair” Metro’s wage structure is, it’s fortuitous for taxpayers and Metro’s customers that the Amalgamated Transit Union’s contract is up on October 31st.  Given Metro’s current budget situation, labor will be left with a difficult choice between preserving compensation or preserving jobs.  We’re likely to come out with a system with a lower cost of operation.

You can see the report to Metro’s Transit Task Force for yourself here, but some images below the jump highlight the most interesting data.

In related but more boring news that may give ATU some confidence, PubliCola reports that the union won an arbitration case involving furlough pay.

(more…)

Seattle City Councilmember Tom Rasmussen

The Seattle City Council Transportation Committee is considering a bill today from Councilmember Rassmussen that would cut off funding for updating the city’s Transit Master Plan without further council approval.

The bill says that while the Mayor already has the authority to coordinate with the City “Council and Council Central Staff to frame for Council review and approval the vision, goals, schedule, and scope of work to update the,” the bill would disallow the executive from actually working to “implement the update” to the Master Plan “until authorized by future ordinance.”

Rasmussen has recently come under fire from some greenies for being skeptical of the Nickerson Street “road diet.” He told PubliCola that he didn’t see the Council taking action to stop that project.

Updating the Transit Master Plan is one of the planks of the “Walk. Bike. Ride.” initiative that Seattle Mayor McGinn announced last month, and McGinn has said the update will include a study for light rail expansion to Ballard and West Seattle.

Rasmussen may be trying to separate the Mayor’s light rail election promise from an update of the Transit Master Plan, which would otherwise focus on how to align bus service in the coming years. Another motive could be a turf war: in effect, letting the Mayor know that the council should have a big say in the parameters guiding the Transit Master Plan update. Note the “Council review and approval” in the bill language.

Update: PubliCola has Rasmussen on the record for why he’s proposed the bill.  Speaking of the record, the fizz got the story up before us so make sure to give their post a read.

Now that the deep-bore tunnel completion date has been moved back to November 2016, it happens to coincide neatly with the projected opening of University Link. This makes further mockery of the Governor’s promise to tear the viaduct down by 2012.  Regardless, let’s compare the vital statistics of University Link and its evil twin:

Of course, I’m having a little fun here.  University Link is a slam dunk of a project and “worse than U-Link” is hardly a strong criticism.  That said, there are probably people out there who favor the road project but not the rail one, which simply doesn’t hold up to scrutiny.

¹ depending on what you count.
² 70,000 people will get on or off at the two stations; 72,000 more will get on or off between Northgate and Brooklyn. If all of those 72,000 continue to UW station and beyond, the number is 142,000; if none of them do, it’s 70,000; I’d argue it’d be towards the higher end of the range. I couldn’t find ridership numbers for stations north of Northgate, so I haven’t counted thousands of riders more.
³ Using USDOT figures for highway lane capacity if everything goes perfectly.  There’s no HOV lane, but you can apply whatever figure you like for people per car (I believe 1.2 is the standard). There are also no plans to put any Metro buses in the tunnel, nor is Metro likely to create a route that bypasses downtown.
⁴ 800 riders per train, 2 minute headways, 2 directions.
⁵ In 2007 dollars; plus you bring your own car and your own gas.
⁶ Westlake to UW, using ST’s current fare structure of $1.75 plus 5 cents/mile, rounded to the nearest quarter.
⁷ “We intend to bring the project in on time and on budget” — the Governor’s spokesperson.

“No metropolis can exist without subways.”

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Photo by MSPdude

I don’t always agree with Tony the Economist, but he usually brings a unique and intelligent perspective. In this comment, he lays out the main points in the argument for streetcars with characteristic deftness. I don’t agree with his characterization of the SLUT as “ridiculous”, or its ridership as “poor“, but regardless this is a great read:

“The investment in streetcars, as with ETBs, is capital costs vs operating costs since the vehicles are more efficient and last longer than a diesel bus.”

Actually, it’s not. Streetcars have higher operating costs than buses per service hour. Streetcars have slightly higher capacity than articulated buses, so it is conceivable that they could have slightly lower operating costs per passenger hour than an equivalent bus, but there are currently no routes with high enough ridership to make that theoretical possibility relevant.

No, streetcars are not cheaper. The justification for streetcars lies in the fact that they generate greater benefits than equivalent bus, not in lower operating costs.

The benefits of streetcars relative to buses are higher ridership, in particular, the ability to attract a different kind of rider: the middle class choice rider, and the ability to catalyze development. These advantages do not, as you suggest, stem from the fact that streetcars are a “novelty”.

More after the jump…

(more…)

King County data workshop
Tuesday, June 8, 5:00-6:30 p.m.

Please join us for our first county-wide open data workshop. Though we’ve released data in machine readable formats for years, we are now working on a project to centralize and expand that work. Before we get too far into the project though, we want to talk with interested developers. What data do you want to work with? How do you want to partner with King County?

• Sign up for the workshop
• Read Council’s data ordinance
• Learn more about the workshop

Questions? Email or call Sabra Schneider at (206) 263-7972. Or if it’s a short one, ask us on twitter.

Note: while this meeting will not focus on Transit Data, King County will be including Transit Data in the workshop and they are interested in hearing from people interested in Transit Data.

Gov. Christine Gregoire (wikimedia)

A brief timeline on Governor Gregoire’s promises on viaduct related issues:

1/3/2008: Gregoire promises a 2012 teardown, for safety reasons:

“It’s coming down in 2012. I’m taking it down — the middle,”…

“That’s the timeline. I’m not going to fudge on it. And if we don’t have some alternative by then, boy are we going to have a mess on our hands because it’s coming down.”

Asked if she, as governor, could trump the state’s largest city and county and unilaterally tear down a highway that carries more than 100,000 vehicles a day through the heart of Seattle, Gregoire said:

“Yeah, watch me.”

The viaduct is now to be torn down by 2016, because safety risks pale compared to the horror of having only one freeway through downtown for four years.

1/13/2009: In a press conference with Mayor Nickels and Executive Sims, Gregoire announces her support for the deep-bore tunnel plan, which includes new state-granted authority for a 1% MVET, bringing in $190m in capital funds and $15m per year for Metro.

2/2/2009: Gregoire backs away from the MVET part of the deal at the first sign of trouble in the legislature:

Legislative leaders in the state House and Senate say the proposed 1 percent motor-vehicle excise tax, or $100 yearly on a $10,000 car, would have a hard time making it through the Legislature this year.

“To the Legislature I say, separate it out from the tunnel because it doesn’t have anything to do with the tunnel,” Gregoire said at a news conference.

5/19/2009: Gregoire goes out of her way to specifically veto a legislative provision allowing Metro to levy a $20 vehicle license fee, aimed at preventing cuts to service rather than expanding it.

6/3/2010: The Governor signs a “letter of commitment” saying “We fully endorse this partnership and are each personally committed to invest the time and resources needed to ensure this program reaches a successful conclusion.”  Still no detail on who would pay for the overruns.

Mike McGinn, apparently disinclined to make empty promises, refuses to sign.

A couple of months ago, Metro considered simplifying the path of Route 22, shifting part of it one block west, to provide for a more direct routing and avoid some difficult intersections.

After a round of public comment, where riders complained they’d have to walk farther and residents worried about the impacts of new service on California Ave, Metro has decided not to do it.

I have absolutely no idea whether or not the revision would have been merited (the most relevant and cogent comment in our thread from a resident was against), but it’s evident that change is hard.

From June 14th through September 10th, SDOT will be replacing the old wooden viaduct structure on NE 45th st. This is the segment of NE 45th that connects UW with University Village / Montlake Avenue.

In preparation for the closure, SDOT has released a handy bike, bus & walk map illustrating the temporary re-routes for buses, bicyclists, and pedestrians.

Download: SDOT bike, bus & walk map

For more information about this project: NE 45th st Viaduct Project Information page