Open Thread 47

115 Replies to “Open Thread 47”

1. Hey! Good job on re-indexing the countdown clock to Seattle time.

   Having it referenced to Zulu was a bit confusing. Thanks.

   1. I’m not sure how the time zone got messed up on the previous links but hopefully it stays fixed for future iterations.

      1. Working fine now. Thanks again.

2. I’ve been looking for opportunities to comment on the CID station locations that no one wants except for a couple powerful voices in the ID that ST is kowtowing to.

   1. So the ST meeting tonight was about CID locations (couldnt tell whether it was about SLU stations). Seemed all comments/questions asked were around the flaws of Dearborn & Civic Center, why we have the current preferred and the desire for a central hub at Union Station. They are gathering information now and the coming months to inform the board as it settles on the final location. They encourage emailing the ST team and also to attend future open house and public meetings. Also I believe an online open house is underway now with open house materials presented tonight being posted online on ST website. If you have concerns about the preferred Dearborn and Civic Center, share them. Ideally address the reasons you do not the preferred (i.e. long uphill walks) and like the hub (convenience and short distance of transfer, etc.). These comments will inform the boards decision.

      1. Thanks for going! It’s always heartening to hear ST staff encouraging public feedback.

3. Nathan: first, SDOT rebranded the Center City Connector (CCC) Streetcar as the Culture Connector (CC) Streetcar. It remains in the STP but it was not included in the top tier of capital projects likely to be funded. Please watch the formation of the transportation levy this year. The CC Streetcar seems to have died of its own fiscal weight. There has been significant opposition to its use of right of way and curb space on 1st Avenue. The required service subsidy was not found. Indeed, the service subsidy for the SLU and First Hill lines is uncertain. The legacy of Mayor Nickels is insecure. There are many unaffordable projects in the SMT. Aside from funding, there is also insufficient right of way for all the projects listed.

   1. The inclusion of the P.S. regarding the CCC was meant as a sort of note that there are many projects in the STP that are more aspirational than practical.

4. Just a heads up. 145th is closed to East-West vehicular traffic at the west end of the overpass crossing I-5. It’s a major construction zone.

   Previously I’ve been able to talk my way through the zone as a pedestrian, but the level of activity has gotten to the point where this is not currently advisable.

   Last week I was still able to talk my way through, but the area is a mess. And this time I was escorted half way through by a police officer and the other half of the way by a construction worker.

   So while it might still be possible to sweet talk your way past the cop if you have good people skills, I wouldn’t do it unless you have an urgent need. And it would be risky to try to talk your way past the cop if you have outstanding warrants.

   Also, it’s a bad look to have someone walking through a construction zone in street clothes when everyone else is in safety vests, steel toed boots, and hard hats. It sends the wrong message about construction site safety.

   LLE and the 148th St Station will open before this road project is complete, so at some point Shoreline is going to have to open a proper pedestrian corridor. But until then I’d just go walking somewhere else.

   1. It is a shame it has taken Shoreline so long to build the pedestrian/bike bridge, as that would be the obvious pathway. Same thing happened with the Northgate bridge. It would have been really nice to be able to walk across it before Link opened. At least with Northgate they finished it when they Link got there — it looks like the bridge in Shoreline won’t open until next year.

   2. Getting the timing right on three different projects created by three different governments (WSDOT, ST, City of Shoreline) is admittedly hard. It’s like ordering food delivered from three different restaurants that would hopefully arrive at the same time. They still are pretty close, but two supporting projects won’t be delivered in time for the LLE grand opening “party”.

      That said, I think the Shoreline South station boardings will be pretty low until both the pedestrian and street crossings are fully open.

      I do think the way that access to Link stations is conceptually developed is flawed and should be changed. ST should lay out the access “end state” design in their final plans with these connections included for at least a block in every direction, and then defer them in a cost savings exercise on those plans.

      For example, Northgate’s bridge connects with the station’s mezzanine level. Had Mt Baker been designed with a mezzanine pedestrian connection option, a new Rainier Ave pedestrian bridge would have been so much more useful to construct.

      1. That said, I think the Shoreline South station boardings will be pretty low until both the pedestrian and street crossings are fully open.

         Yes, although the big increase won’t come until they re-route the 522. Yes, some people will walk to the station. The 72 will add ridership (especially along 145th, since it will be the only bus going along there for now). The 333 will be the main connector to Shoreline College (which could be huge). But the 522 may very well contribute *most* of the ridership to the station.

         Had Mt Baker been designed with a mezzanine pedestrian connection option, a new Rainier Ave pedestrian bridge would have been so much more useful to construct.

         Sure, but it would have been far more useful and simpler if they just built it in the little triangle there (where the transit center is). They didn’t mainly to save money. Thus putting the station there might have been cheaper than building a mezzanine in the current (flawed) location.

         I get your main point though. The one that bugs me is 130th. I get the value-engineering with Mount Baker. The goal was to serve the suburbs, so tough shit Rainier Valley. But 130th seems to be neither here nor there. They didn’t build it straddling 130th, presumably because that would have been more expensive. But then they found out the initial estimates were way off, and the slope of the hill is steeper than they though (which is bizarre, but anyway). Then they insisted on entrances to the north, even though no one is going to use them. I get why you want redundancy, but just build an extra set of elevators (along with stairs — don’t forget the stairs*) and call it a day. There is no reason to treat the station as if people will be approaching from both ends — everyone is going to come from the south. Thus it is neither ideal (straddling 130th) nor cheap (there is an extra set of escalators, elevators and stairs that no one will use).

         * I’m referring to UW Station where they initially didn’t have accessible stairs for riders. They were completely dependent on the escalators and elevators. When the escalators broke everyone lined up for the elevators and there was a huge backup.

      2. @Ross: 130th bugs me too. The design is circuitous for access. In particular, I expect 130th itself to get lots of drop off activity.

         ST still seems to be in the mode that any station design that meets code is good enough. I suspect the unspoken attitude of ST staff is that they resent adding the 130th station at some level.

         Generally, ST still primarily looks at stations as where trains stop. I wonder how much the designers understand people movements. In another example, the South Bellevue down escalator was placed at the north part of the platform rather than at the south entrance. The ST installed a landing at the south stairs / escalator but not the north.

      3. @Al S,

         “ Getting the timing right on three different projects created by three different governments (WSDOT, ST, City of Shoreline) is admittedly hard”

         It’s actually 4 major projects.

         First ST builds Link. Second Shoreline rebuilds the street. Third the ped bridge gets built. And then, after all that, WSDOT does their salmon project.

         Ya, after all this is done, WSDOT is going to do a salmon passage project sort of like they are doing in Factoria right now. Bypassing 2000 ft of dual culvert under the freeway, new under passage, daylighted creek on the Westside, blah blah blah. Huge project, and it comes forth!

         So far WSDOT’s coordination with Shoreline is to request them not to replant trees after their ped bridge project. Seems like a small effort, but at least it is something.

5. The ST March 2024 ridership is out. Link recovered to have 1K more average weekday riders than in 2023.

   https://www.soundtransit.org/ride-with-us/system-performance-tracker/ridership

   Curiously, Link got more riders on an average Saturday and average Sunday than in an average weekday.

   Sounder ridership is roaring back in contrast — both North and South.

   1. Sounder ridership is roaring back in contrast — both North and South.

      That is not what I see. It seems pretty stable now. Ridership was a bit lower in March than February but still higher than January. In contrast, this time last year there was a steady month-to-month increase. Things more or less leveled off in the summer. It is hard to spot trends — maybe the numbers will go up again the next few months — but my guess is we are basically settling in here at about this level (between 6 to 8 thousand a day). Prior to the pandemic it is was around 15 to 17 thousand. That is for South Sounder (or Sounder as a whole). North Sounder has a similar pattern and is somewhere in the 300s (after having about 1,500 before the pandemic).

      1. Sounder is still well below half of their peak glory days. I didn’t mean to imply otherwise.

         I’ll be more curious to see what happens to Sounder ridership when LLE, FWLE and Stride open. I’m expecting some additional ridership loss. Even though these projects are a few miles away from Sounder, lots of Sounder riders park at stations. Some (not many but some) will prefer the day-long frequency availability of these other services over the time limits imposed by using Sounder even though Sounder is much faster, and will drive the extra 2-3 miles.

      2. For most of the Sounder Stations there is good complementary bus service. It isn’t as frequent as Link, but the 578 seems adequate if you are taking Sounder from Auburn, Sumner or Puyallup. Hard to see Link as tipping the balance for those riders. Link already goes past Tukwila, which leaves basically Kent. Kent doesn’t have great express service so I could see a few riders switching. Then again, it is quite likely those riders just drive to Angle Lake right now. The stops with Federal Way Link will be closer, so it could be enough for a handful to switch. I can think of plenty of scenarios where someone would prefer Link over Sounder, but my guess is those people already drive (or take the bus) to Link.

         North Sounder is a bit different. Things don’t really change for Everett. For the other stations the big question is the ferry. There will be buses now connecting those riders to Seattle. This might fit someone’s schedule a lot better than Sounder. But it isn’t really an either/or thing. They might time the trip in the morning to catch Sounder and then leave early by using Link/bus/ferry. My guess is there will be a small decrease in Sounder ridership, but a bigger decrease in people driving onto the ferry.

         My guess is whatever switching goes on won’t be noticeable. A few dozen, maybe even a few hundred, but it will be hard to pinpoint Link as the reason (since there is that much fluctuation in general).

      3. It’s hard to generalize because there are many different kinds of trip destinations as well as time of day factors.

         I see switching from Sounder to Link when these situations occur.

         1. Destinations when someone is riding Link anyway. If I’m at UW and want to get home to Puyallup, I may just get on 1 Line and ride all the way to Federal Way and hop in my parked car. There is effort to get to King Street and wait for another train.

         2. Staying late. While 578 is there, a wait becomes up to 30 minutes. If I attend a business dinner near Westlake, I may not feel safe waiting that long in Downtown Seattle in the evening. Plus the last 578 leaves Second and Pike at 11:00 pm while the last Link train leaves Westlake at 12:38 am so that starts to be tight if I go somewhere after dinner or an event.

         3. Living in between Sounder and Link. North Sounder runs along the shore so anyone south of Everett is between the two station types. South Sounder has some areas like that too. Plus, the 167 project in Fife will make getting to FW Station much faster than it is today.

         4. Connecting buses. If I want to ride a frequent bus like Swift, I pretty much have to use Link. Sure Blue Swift goes to Everett but it’s the end of the line so using it feels like backtracking. Swift serves Link, not Sounder.

         I do think there will be more numerical switching from Sounder South but a higher percentage from Sounder North.

         I was struck by the number of interviewed East Link riders this weekend saying that they wanted to ride Link to SeaTac. Route 560 goes there already today! It’s just illustrative that people do have a preference of rail over bus even though the resulting impact may be relatively insignificant.

      4. Yeah, I can definitely see why some people prefer Link over Sounder. Link (like a normal metro) covers more than just downtown. Sounder (like a typical commuter rail) does not. Anyone headed to Rainier Valley from the south would prefer taking Link from the south over taking Sounder and then the 7.

         What I’m saying though, is that those folks are already taking Link. Not all of them (of course) but 99% of them. For example you mentioned people:

         Living in between Sounder and Link. North Sounder runs along the shore so anyone south of Everett is between the two station types.

         But those people aren’t riding North Sounder. Nobody south of Downtown Everett is driving north to catch Sounder. They are driving to a park and ride and taking an express bus (to either downtown or to Link). They aren’t driving to Edmonds or Mukilteo because parking there aren’t that many cheap parking spots. The extension doesn’t change the dynamics at all.

         For South Sounder the geography is a bit different. But it is important to note that while the connection to Link is not ideal, it still exists. If I live close to Federal Way I might take the express bus either direction. Or I might take a bus that connects to Link. The 574 is not that frequent, but it is fast. The A is not that fast, but it is frequent. The extension adds value, but it’s not like Link suddenly becomes relevant for people who live to the south.

         Just to be clear I could see someone thinking that Angle Lake is too far of a drive, but the nearest Sounder station isn’t. But if you are in between Kent Station and Highline College, it really isn’t that far to drive to Angle Lake. The extension helps, but it isn’t a major game changer. It could be for Auburn versus Federal Way, but many of those people just take the bus from Federal Way (which runs express all-day every half hour). We are talking edge-riders or what I call tipping point riders. Either option works, but some combination involving Link works just a bit better now. I see that, but I just think there are only a handful of riders in that category. The vast majority of Sounder riders will just keep catching Sounder because it works really, really well for them. In terms of speed to downtown it just blows the socks off of Link, or even an express bus (from most locations). It is also quite comfortable — much more comfortable than Link. Even if they plan on taking the train one direction it is worth it (since the bus isn’t bad). With the bus a reasonable backup, it is even better. For them Link simply changes the nature of their backup. For example you might regularly take Sounder from Auburn to Downtown Seattle. If you have to leave in the middle of the day, you take the 578. In the future you would take Link and some sort of bus that connects from Federal Way (Link) Station to Auburn (Sounder) Station. Link ridership goes up, but Sounder ridership remains the same.

         That is where the big change occurs. Not from Sounder to Link, but from the buses to Link (and from driving to transit).

      5. Well chicken and the egg with North Sounder, no one uses it because it has 2 trains in the morning and 2 in the evening. Because no one uses it, it has 2 train each way a day. Don’t blame people for driving to a P&R with bus/Link every 8-20 mins for the schedule flexibility.

      6. And they don’t use it because it doesn’t go to Lynnwood ,where most of the population is centered around.

   2. Curiously, Link got more riders on an average Saturday and average Sunday than in an average weekday.

      Wow, Sundays were huge — 112,000 on average. I don’t know why. It looks like the Sounders and Kraken played on Saturdays. Maybe the Cherry trees?

      1. You can’t take link directly to Seattle center but it may (depending on your origin of trip) be the most convenient with a transfer downtown

         The hot chocolate run (March 3rd?) and the st pattys day dash (March 17th) both were on sundays so maybe this played a role. Lots of people out and about on these days anecdotally

         I was curious if the krakens game and monster jam on March 30th played a roll. Anecdotally I took link later in the day with my dad for that and the trains were absolutely packed from northgate, standing room only, getting even more packed after U-district, and not enough space to walk around without people pushing into each other. But apparently this was a Saturday which could in part explain weekend ridership but not as much Sunday ridership

         Of course these are only anecdotes. A couple personal experiences of packed trains are still just personal experiences

      2. Role* [Fixed]

      3. Leads to the question: should ST offer more service on weekends than on weekdays?

   3. @Al S,

      “ Sounder ridership is roaring back in contrast — both North and South.”

      I have heard the same thing about Sounder. Really impressive ridership gains. And the data aligns with what I have seen personally.

      Link ridership has also been solid, and weekends in particular have seen big gains as people get more used to the idea that they have a fast, reliable alternative to being stuck in traffic.

      The next year is going to be really exciting for transit regionally. About time!

      1. I have heard the same thing about Sounder. Really impressive ridership gains. And the data aligns with what I have seen personally.

         Wrong. Ridership for South Sounder is down for March. This is unusual. Ridership went up in March 2019, 2021, 2022 and 2023. The only other year when ridership was down for March was in 2020 (when the pandemic spread to Washington State). Here are the daily numbers for the last six months:

         October: 7,367
         November: 6,776
         December: 6,185
         January: 6,853
         February: 7,307
         March: 7,137

         Since Sounder South hit a low back in April of 2020 (with 1,009 riders) this is one of the few periods without a clear upward trend. South Sounder averaged 16,452 in 2019. So it appears that Sounder has basically stabilized to about half of what it was and is no longer gaining. We should see seasonal gains (April should be higher than March) but it is unlikely we will see any big gains or anything like we what we had before the pandemic.

6. Does Metro provide the exact address of new bus stops that will be created as a result of the upcoming service change in September? I live near the future 333 route which will be replacing the 347. I currently live a block away from a bus stop but the new route will be routed on an adjacent street and it will no longer run past this stop. There currently is no bus service whatsoever on the road it will be routed onto, and was mildly curious where the new stop(s) might end up being placed. Anybody have any idea where I could find this information?

7. Apparently LA Metro will begin installing cameras backed with image recognition to ticket bus lane scofflaws automatically. Obviously there’s civil liberty and privacy concerns, but given the combination of ignorance and willful disregard of traffic laws among a sizable number of drivers, this might be the only way to even attempt to tackle the problem.

   1. I think several cities have experimented with this or are using it (https://www.governing.com/transportation/cities-hope-ai-camera-enforcement-can-improve-bus-service). I’m not sure how well they are working. Seattle has a system with cameras mounted on corners (similar to red light cameras). https://www.axios.com/local/seattle/2023/03/21/cameras-caught-drivers-illegally-using-bus-lanes. I think this along with cameras for speeding (which are common in Europe) is definitely the way to go.

   2. What “civil liberty” is violated by a camera taking your picture if you are driving where you are not supposed to be driving? Civil liberties protect your right to express your opinion about questions of importance to you. They have nothing to do with your “right” to break a law, except possibly if you do it in a symbolic way to emphasize a point.

      Driving in a bus lane randomly doesn’t meet that exception. A caravan driving in one with banners about the “injustice” might.

      1. People are nervous about cameras used by the police. It is easy to see how this could result in a loss of civil liberties. Imagine a police chief (say, fearing accusations of harassment) decides to dig up dirt on his accusers. He asks the police IT department to go through the millions of pictures of cars taken every day and focus on ones with certain license plates. Sure enough, they find pictures of a car parked in an embarrassing location that they could use as blackmail.

         All this really means though, is that we need good safeguards for this sort of technology (that has actually been around a while). Google takes pictures of people all the time. I’ve seen pictures of my car at friend’s houses. If it was at old girlfriend’s house it would be, well, awkward. The point being that it wouldn’t be that hard for Google to do the same sort of thing as the police (in case they were facing accusations of say, monopolistic practices). In my opinion it is common to underestimate the way that businesses violate your privacy, and overestimate what the police do.

         In general we just need to get used to this, and realize that the technology isn’t the problem. It is how they are used. They have these cameras in Europe and many of those countries are considered better than the U. S. when it comes to civil liberties (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/freedom-index-by-country).

8. Might be good to cut back the 550 to South Bellevue at rush hour to avoid the auto congestion on Bellevue Way and force the transfer when service is frequent. Off peak continue the 550 into Downtown Bellevue when service is less frequent.

   Any talk of branding the 542 as a BRT line to complement Link? It’s practically BRT now with the Freeway Stations and HOV lanes and ties nicely into the network.

   1. I am kind of disappointed that ST didn’t brand a temporary “2 Line bus bridge” between Stadium or CID and South Bellevue.

      This portion of Route 550 is just about 15 minutes of a full 35 minute one-way trip between the two downtowns.

      Then ST could double the frequency so 15 minutes midday becomes 7.5 minutes and 10 minutes peak becomes 5 minutes with service to spare. And no new buses would be required.

      If the 2 Line was fully open but this segment was closed for an extended emergency, this bus bridge would be what would be provided. In a conceptual way, that service omission is what we effectively have today.

      The bus connection diagrams at 2 Link station instead just lists route numbers that go to both lines all feeding a single thin black line. A rider has to figure out the abstract purpose of the diagram and then match the route number on the left with one on the right — and even then it’s not clear if the path is reasonable.

      1. I am kind of disappointed that ST didn’t brand a temporary “2 Line bus bridge” between Stadium or CID and South Bellevue.

         But what about Bellevue Way? Look at the numbers from before the pandemic (these are for a westbound bus with stop, on and off):

         Bellevue Way NE & NE 4th St: 349 25
         Bellevue Way SE & Main St: 233 28
         Bellevue Way & SE 3rd St: 104 42
         Bellevue Way & SE 11th St: 44 15
         Bellevue Way & SE 16th St: 105 28

         That was about 25% of the ridership. So not only would you be creating two extra transfers for the most common trip pair (north end of Downtown Seattle to Downtown Bellevue) but you would force a lot of riders to take an infrequent bus (the 249) for one leg of their journey. Sorry, but that just won’t work.

         This gets back to what we talked about before. It really doesn’t make sense to have a restructure based on the starter line. It just doesn’t do enough to change things.

      2. Good to know about Bellevue Way ridership, I hear you guys… makes sense to keep then. But the traffic does greatly delay the buses at rush hour. It’s like 25 minutes from BTC to SBTC around 4:30-6:00pm.

      3. You’ve convinced me that it makes sense to leave Route 550 alone for now. It would have made sense only if the Eastside restructure was implemented so Bellevue Way stops would have been served by new routes.

         I noticed that ST has already updated their PDF schedules for ST Express to show light rail connectivity to both lines. I commend ST for that.

         Did ST introduce any other on-street markings or bus signs to show which lines connect to both lines? At some point, it seems useful to say “to 1 Line” or “To 2 Line” on a bus stop since the lines will be a key destination in every route that goes by a station.

      4. Good to know about Bellevue Way ridership, I hear you guys… makes sense to keep then. But the traffic does greatly delay the buses at rush hour. It’s like 25 minutes from BTC to SBTC around 4:30-6:00pm.

         I could see the bus running express from Downtown Seattle to Downtown Bellevue. There are HOV lanes much of the way. That would leave a coverage hole, but that could be filled with different routes. For whatever reason, ST/Metro decided not to do that. Obviously that would cost more (and some riders would come out behind) but it seems like it would be worth it. We could change it now but it would be odd timing since things will be completely redone as soon as Link gets here. There is also the driver shortage we are dealing with as well (and doing that would require extra service).

         If ridership on the 550 was really high and the buses were stuffed, then it would be a great candidate for an express overlay. Run the regular 550 consistently and often (e. g. every ten minutes) but then run an express during rush hour that skips Bellevue Way. You give some riders an express, while reducing crowding in an economical way (an express carries just as many riders but doesn’t take as long to run). Various routes used to do that. For example the 301 was an express overlay for the RapidRide E. It used the freeway so it was significantly faster from Aurora Village to downtown while reducing crowding on the main line. But since the pandemic, none of the buses are that crowded. None of them have the big peak-demand where we are running extra buses *only* because they are crowded.

      5. Ross , Are you comparing March 2024 with March 2023? March 2024 had 7,137 average weekday riders while March 2023 had 4,787 for Sounder South. March 2019 was 14,955.

         Sounder North had 344 for March 2024 versus 150 for March 2023. March 2019 was 1,430.

         The Sounder ridership however has been pretty steady since summer 2023.

         The “month-over-month” column is comparing March with February, not 2024 with 2023.

      6. @Al S,

         I think you misplaced this comment, but you are correct.

         The proper comparison is year over year, and Sounder is showing big gains in year over year ridership.

         A doubling of N Sounder ridership and a 50% increase in S Sounder ridership in just one year certainly qualify as big gains.

         Of course we still aren’t anywhere near 2019 levels, but that is exactly what one would expect with a commute type service serving primarily downtown Seattle.

      7. @Al — Your comment is in the wrong place, but we might as well discuss it here. I’m looking at all the data. It is hard to summarize the data, but here goes:

         Prior to the pandemic: Ridership bobs up and down month to month
         Start of the pandemic: Ridership plummets.
         During the pandemic: Ridership grows.
         Now: ?

         There are basically three possibilities for the period we are in now:

         1) Ridership goes down. This seems highly unlikely (absent a major economic event).
         2) Ridership continues to go up.
         3) Ridership levels off.

         I’m making the claim that ridership has leveled off. Obviously it will take a lot more data to prove this, but it sure looks that way to me. Maybe I’m wrong on this. Maybe we are still in the growth phase and will level off sometime later. But the first year that things level off you will still see numbers higher than the year before. By my estimation we leveled off during the summer, so we will continue to see year-to-year numbers go up for the next few months.

         My main point is that there is nothing suggesting we are still in the big growth phase based on this month or even the last six months. This is in contrast to this time last year. It is quite possible that our growth phase — or what should be called our “partial rebound” phase is coming to an end.

      8. Off-peak it’s common for 5-10 people to board at Bellevue Square — the same number as at Bellevue TC. And then another few at Main Street. This is Bellevue Way’s primary route, and there’s apartments and/or retail all along it. The only other routes are the 30-60 minute 241 and 249 on separate parts of it. So if you delete the 550 you’d have to replace it with something else, and it’s too sudden and short-term for ST or Metro to do that, given that the restructure is expected next year.

   2. If ST truncated the route 550 at South Bellevue during peak hours, there would be so many complaints they would quickly have to reverse the decision.

      1. Agreed. Not only would it mean a transfer for the riders headed to Downtown Bellevue but it would be a real pain in the butt for those headed to Bellevue Way. Prior to the pandemic ridership from those two areas greatly exceeded the ridership of South Bellevue. South Bellevue has never had as many riders as Mercer Island or Downtown Bellevue. Even in its heyday it was about equal to the stops between South Bellevue and Downtown Bellevue.

   3. The 550 serves bus stops on Bellevue Way. It can’t be truncated without screwing over people who use those stops.

9. I was wondering about catching the new 2 line up to Redmond from Issaquah where I live. Perplexing, the very meandering 269 is still the best bus for this. To Overlake from Issaquah? The 1.5 hour ride on the 271 & 245. Maybe if you leave at the right time you can catch the morning 556 to S. Bellevue and catch the 2 line.

   I wrote to Sound Transit and asked if there was any plan to increase service of the 556 given it’s excellent synchronicity with the new 2 line. I was told there was no plan to adjust buses based on the 2 line at all.

   I asked if there was a plan to adjust bus service when the 2 crossed lake Washington next year. I pointed out that a bus running from North Bend to the S. Bellevue Park & Ride would open up a great deal of Seattle and the Eastside for convenient access to people living of I-90.

   The response I got indicated that buses would only be adjusted to remove any redundancy across the lake. It can’t possibly be the intention of Sound Transit to do absolutely nothing to make it easier for everyone on I-90 to access the new light rail. The South Bellevue station is practically begging to be a transfer point for loads of I-90 commuters.

   1. When the full restructure goes in, Link to South Bellevue, followed by 554 to Issaquah is probably the best option, although it will still take a long time.

      In the meantime, there’s always the bike option via the East Lake Sammamish trail. It’s 12 miles, but it’s flat and has no cars to deal with.

   2. The Starter Line period has no bus changes except the 221, which now serves Overlake Village Station. The rest of the bus network pretends Link isn’t there because the line is so short. That way transit isn’t worse than before.

      There will be a bus restructure when the full 2 Line opens:

      203: Local from South Bellevue to Factoria, Newport Way, NW Sammamish Road, Issaquah Highlands P&R.
      215, 218, 269: Express from Mercer Island to Issaquah Highlands P&R. The 269 continues to Sammamish and Marymoor Village Station. Every third 215 continues to North Bend.
      554: Express from Bellevue TC, Bellevue Way, South Bellevue Station. local on Gilman Blvd in Issaquah. This replaces the 550 and 556. It’s unclear whether it will serve the Highlands.

      That’s per the “final” proposal in 2022. In January Metro asked its review boards if needs have changed since then. That’s all we know until the real final goes to the county council for approval. That would be by Spring 2025 for an opening in the fall.

      1. “It’s unclear whether [the 554] will serve the Highlands.”

         The issue here is that on the route map, the full-time 554 appears to end just north of I-90, and only “select trips” continue to the Highlands, Sammamish, and Marymoor Village. We’re not sure if that’s really the case or a mistake in the map. What would it terminate at just north of I-90? Swedish? The freeway exit? Would a route terminating at Swedish (at the bottom of the hill) but not the Highlands (at the top) be a good thing?

         My biggest concern is intra-Issaquah connectivity. The Highlands must have good service to central Issaquah, and I’m afraid this restructure might not. It seems to treat them as two different cities that nobody goes between. I’ve never lived in Issaquah or spent much time there so I don’t fully know the travel patterns, but it seems to be axiomatic that a city should have good intra-city transit.

      2. The issue here is that on the route map, the full-time 554 appears to end just north of I-90, and only “select trips” continue to the Highlands, Sammamish, and Marymoor Village. We’re not sure if that’s really the case or a mistake in the map.

         We know there is a mistake on the map. This has lead to uncertainty as to what the plans are. I would be willing to be that they plan on sending most buses to Issaquah Highlands for several reasons:

         1) It is what the bus does now.

         2) There is nothing in the text that suggests that most buses won’t go to Issaquah Highlands. In contrast, the text clearly states that the bus will only serve Sammamish with select early/late trips.

         3) The map doesn’t make sense. From the last stop (in downtown Issaquah) the bus would go a while on the street but not make any stops at all, then end abruptly on the freeway overpass.

         Thus there are two possibilities:

         1) They made a mistake on the map and simply didn’t draw the dark line all the way to Issaquah Highlands.

         2) They are going to make a major change but forgot to mention it the text. They also made a mistake on the map by extending the dark line too far (they meant to end it in Downtown Issaquah). They also forgot to label the stop that will be terminus for most of the routes (Downtown Issaquah).

         I think it is pretty obvious it is the first one.

      3. I agree with Ross: the tail of the 554 is very unlikely to change.

   3. Yeah, when Link goes across the lake the buses will be restructured and the buses to Issaquah — especially the Highlands — will run a lot more often. Neither ST nor Metro wanted to change things before then.

      Certain trips within the East Side will probably be better by bus even after the restructure though. The starter line forms a rough and somewhat distant semi-circle around Issaquah (this will be the case as it extends to Downtown Redmond). In other words it is about the same distance to each station. Thus taking the train often doesn’t get you much. From Issaquah to South Bellevue means going west-northwest. Link then goes east-northeast, which means you are backtracking quite a ways. Sometimes the speed of the freeway and Link makes up for it. But not to that many destinations. The buses that go from Issaquah to South Bellevue will continue to Downtown Bellevue. You can transfer, but it is probably faster to just stay on the bus. To places in Redmond it may be faster to take a bus (or two). That leaves the stations in between like Wilburton, Spring District and BelRed.

      The big change for riders in Issaquah will be when the train goes across the lake. There will be frequent service to both South Bellevue and to Mercer Island. Either will get you to Seattle.

      1. The problem with the 554 and “intra/Issaquah connectivity” is there really is no “central Issaquah”, at least not today. As someone who lives in Issaquah most of the residents and surrounding residents don’t see transit as something you use intra Issaquah but something you use to go to work or a destination outside Issaquah with more density or to avoid paid parking

         While Issaquah is likely the largest retailer on the Eastside despite having only 35,000 residents, and maybe in all of King Co., it is very car/big box store oriented. The size of the retail area east and west of I-90 is huge, as are the surface parking lots. It is not remotely walkable even if not carrying anything. Very few buildings are more than one story.

         I think the key to the 554 when Line 2 fully opens will be to hit as many park and rides in Issaquah as possible, and as few other stops except Eastgate before reaching S. Bellevue. From S. Bellevue someone from the greater Issaquah area can transfer to Link to Seattle, or eastbound without having to backtrack from Mercer Island.

         It isn’t clear that when the 2 Line opens across the lake how many going to downtown Bellevue will transfer to the 2 Line from the 554, and it isn’t clear how many driving to a park and ride from North Bend to Snoqualmie to Issaquah to Sammamish will instead just drive to the S. Bellevue park and ride rather than catch a bus to get to S. Bellevue. Traffic congestion on this part of I-90 is not bad (405 is bad).

         Based on park and ride utilization rates pre-pandemic I would guess most would just drive to S. Bellevue to catch Line 2 east or west, or even to take the 554 to Bellevue Way to avoid parking costs. .

      2. Thanks for your Issaquah perspective.

         “Very few buildings are more than one story.”

         Seattle and Bellevue were mostly 1-2 story until the 1990s. Downtown Bellevue had only a couple buildings taller than that. (Mostly around 108th-110th where the transit center is, which had been the highest-zoned area for decades.) Capitol Hill and Ballard had mostly 1-2 story buildings. So things can change rapidly in a couple decades. I don’t expect Issaquah to grow as much because it’s further out and more isolated, but when they get to filling the northwest Issaquah village in earnest, things could change.

      3. It is worth mentioning that Metro will run express buses from Issaquah Highlands to Mercer Island. The combination 215/269 will be as frequent as the 554. During peak Metro is planning on running the 218 as well. From the Highlands this looks like a faster way to get to Downtown Seattle.

         The Highlands is mostly low density housing, but there are apartments not too far from the park and ride. There are also some shops up there and a branch of Swedish Hospital (although it looks hard to access the hospital). Likewise what I think of as “Downtown Issaquah” is the area close to the library. There are some shops there as well as some apartments scattered around. Thus I do see value in connecting the Highlands with that part Issaquah (which is what the 554 does) even if the vast majority of Issaquah riders will be headed outside of Issaquah.

10. Mike Lindblom (Seattle Times, $) reports that the automatic counters counted about 35,000 boardings on the East Link Starter Line on Saturday. https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/heres-how-many-people-celebrated-eastside-light-rail-opening/

11. I wasn’t expecting to do it, but I ended up needing to go to Bellevue today for an errand. So I took the opportunity to ride ELSL while I was there. I didn’t have a lot of time, so I only saw four stations.

    I parked at SBTC and was sort of surprised at how full it was. There were cars parked on every level of the garage, and I’d say total cars parked were in the 200 to 400 range. Maybe more.

    I rode to East Main and then got off to do my errand. Station was fine, and the park over the “Bellevue Portal to Overlake” was a bonus. Just wish Bellevue was more pedestrian friendly. Sort of reminds me of LA.

    Reboarded at East Main with the intent to go to RTC, but I sort of had to “turn my bicycle around” (as the Brits say), so I got off at Spring District and went to Bellevue Brewing to use the facilities and do some paper work.

    Spring District station is fine. Was sort of surprised how well the two side platforms integrate with the plaza above.

    Then rode to RTC to check it out. No real opinion on the station, just didn’t leave much of an impression either way.

    Checked out the new ped bridge and was very impressed. All the center supports seem to have power, so I’m guessing the canopy lights up in some interesting ways at night.

    Was also impressed with the plant selections on the bridge. I don’t think I have ever seen a commercial landscape installation that has used any Lewisia, and there was a lot of it on the bridge. That is not your typical plant for commercial landscape applications.

    Rode back to SBTC without getting off and checked the speed along the way. Peak speed registered at 52 mph, which isn’t bad, and it was sure a lot faster than being stuck in traffic.

    Ridership was nowhere near what you would see in Seattle, but there were still a few people getting on at every station, And this was about 1 pm on only the second day of operation. Very encouraging.

    All in all, a successful day.

    1. “Sort of reminds me of LA.”

       Bellevue reminds me of Los Angeles too. It’s the parking minimums. That puts a ceiling on density and the pedestrian experience. Because those garages take up space, and you have to walk past the entrances, and five-lane arterials and huge interchanges. Los Angeles and San Jose have medium density more even everywhere, while New York has higher-density peaks in Manhattan and lower density in the suburbs. Seattle and Bellevue are also peaky, with downtown Seattle more like Manhattan and downtown Bellevue more like Los Angeles, and the low-density areas lower. But parking minimums prevent ultra-high density and the friendliest walking environment.

12. I am thrilled to have my work linked here, thank you STB.

    It is my mission to get Tacoma and Sound Transit to conduct railway system planning here in a comprehensive manner—before any environmental review process begins—and which reinforces the growth objectives of the city and region. This must include a corridor alternatives analysis and associated planning for our massive TCC extension project. Tacoma has long been subject to patchwork railway planning that is working toward an incoherent and disconnected whole. This trend must end.

    I think there is clear pathway to improving transit connectivity in Tacoma that tees-up the city for future growth and, potentially, expansions of the T Line under future Sound Transit ballot measures. That is a T Line extension over 6th Avenue and Mildred Street to TCC. However, I just want all credible options to be properly considered and evaluated, and that is not happening nor even on the table at this time. That is unacceptable for what could be a $500 million project (when holding the costs to construct Hilltop Link).

    The timing is particularly crucial as we undergo the periodical update of our comprehensive plan, which should reflect core elements or alternatives of the project.

    1. Ah, no. Just no. No more light rail in Tacoma unless it goes to the Tacoma Mall and then the answer still is…. no.

       Look Troy. Tacoma has a lot of problems…. Homelessness. A non-functioning bus system. If you really believed in public transit, ask your city council person to fund more bus routes in Tacoma. The City could easily buy more transit from Pierce Transit at any time. The City government makes zero investment and commitment in public transit.

       Please, for the love of God, stop pumping light rail projects for North Tacoma the rest of the City and Country do not wish to pay for. If you feel so strongly about 6th Ave light rail…. start a petition with the City to get a Citywide vote on it. This is a local project, not regional rail. Sound Transit can be paying for 2 mile dead end rail spurs with County wide funds, right?

       ST3 did not pass in Pierce County. ST4 will not pass in Pierce County. Sound Transit cannot send money planning unfunded future rail projects the public never voted on. Please, spend your time fixing the damn poor quality bus system we currently have and stop trying to get light rail built.

       [Edited to remove Ad hominem attack. Reminder of the comment policy: https://seattletransitblog.com/comment-policy/%5D

       1. tacomee, expansion of T-link is part of ST3, and the routes that Troy discusses are the routes under consideration for the expansion. Pierce County is already paying for the extension, so they should probably get it. If Pierce County wants more local buses, they should fund Pierce Transit.

       2. In previous posts Troy has made it clear that he would shift service from the various trains to the buses. His point is that if you are going to run the trains, do it right. This goes for the streetcar as well as Link. It not a good idea to run Link all the way to the Tacoma Dome. But if you do go all the way to the Tacoma Dome, then you should go to Downtown Tacoma.

          It is like West Seattle Link. A lot of people (myself included) think there should be improved bus service to West Seattle instead of a new Link line to the peninsula. But if you are going to run the train to West Seattle than all three lines should go into the same (existing) tunnel.

       3. “expansion of T-link is part of ST3, and the routes that Troy discusses are the routes under consideration for the expansion.”

          6th Avenue is an ST alternative for the TCC project?

       4. No corridor has ever been formally programmed for the TCC project, including 19th Street. I argue that this is easily proven by publicly available official records and statements that affirm as much. I provide those in the reports, particularly my original post on the subject and the subsequent planning update. These are linked in the employment article. Certainly, there never was a corridor alternatives analysis completed for the TCC project. The City of Tacoma has taken the ballot representative alignment of 19th Street and run with it, which effectively avoids a proper corridor and transit system analysis. There are other corridors capable of serving Downtown Tacoma to TCC.

          Additionally, thank you, Nathan and Ross. Those are my sentiments exactly. The project is coming whether one likes it or not, barring some major development. Tacomee is more than free to complain at Sound Transit about buses.

          https://www.soundtransit.org/system-expansion/tcc-tacoma-link-extension

          Finally, the West Seattle Link analogy is particularly compelling. Like Tacoma Link in Downtown Tacoma, the transit infrastructure in Downtown Seattle already exists and is capable of hosting all regional Link trains following some comparatively reasonable modifications. And yet it seems very unlikely to happen.

       5. This is probably a dumb question but will the Tacoma ST area have the money to build light rail to Tacoma Dome? I know a lot of the ST areas are having problems with less tax revenue or increasing project costs. Can other ST areas like Seattle help Tacoma out? Doesn’t Tacoma have to pay 1/2 of the second tunnel in downtown Seattle? How much will that cost?

          Will the Tacoma area have the money to build light rail to Tacoma Mall or downtown? I know it is a long ways off. Where will it get that money? Would it need a new levy. Would the new levy be just for the Tacoma area? Does anyone know why ST chose Tacoma Mall? I don’t know how I would vote because Tacoma Mall and downtown wouldn’t serve me.

          If the Tacoma area will never have the money to build light rail past the T Dome why are people arguing over it (and I have no idea whether the Mall or downtown is better although there is the T Line which I don’t think is great).

          Sorry for so many dumb questions.

       6. All good questions:
          will the Tacoma ST area have the money to build light rail to Tacoma Dome? …. Yes, currently ST3 is “affordable” across the current plan. TDLE is fully funded; any delay would be due to execution (for example, the long-span bridge issue FW Link ran into). If Pierce “ran out of money,” that would impact projects later in the queue, namely the Streetcar Phase III or perhaps some of the Sounder capacity expansion.

          Can other ST areas like Seattle help Tacoma out? … Currently no, ST has a policy of subarea equity, where each subarea pays for “their projects.” However, a large chunk of spend is shared regionally, such as Admin/IT costs.
          Doesn’t Tacoma have to pay 1/2 of the second tunnel in downtown Seattle? How much will that cost? … The 2nd tunnel segment ID to Westlake stations is to be split regionally, based on projected ridership by region. Pierce will likely have the lowest share of the 4 subarea because it is further from Seattle and therefore will have the lowest share of ridership.

          Will the Tacoma area have the money to build light rail to Tacoma Mall or downtown? I know it is a long ways off. Where will it get that money? Would it need a new levy. Would the new levy be just for the Tacoma area? … ST3 has only funded preliminary design & engineering. There would need to be new funding of some form. IMO it would most likely be a regional “ST4” levy, but it could plausibly be a Pierce-only project, funded by the state or Feds directly, or some combination of the above.

          Does anyone know why ST chose Tacoma Mall? … at the request of Pierce politicians. That corridor was in the Long Range Plan (from 2014).

       7. * projected ridership by region … ridership within that specific segment, ID to Westlake. Ridership elsewhere in the network is not a part of the formula (but presumably is an input into the ridership forecast model)

       8. These are not dumb questions, but very good ones for which Pierce County needs to get a grip on. Since roughly 1999, the planning of the Pierce County light railways has been a literal mess of uncertainty and contradictory decisions.

          The expansion of the T Line to Tacoma Community College is a voter approved, ostensibly fully funded Sound Transit 3 project, just like Tacoma Dome (Central) Link. You raise a good point about severe Sound Transit cost escalations, however. With updated baseline costs, might there be issues concerning the agency’s debt ceiling? We can only speculate.

          The Tacoma Mall light rail expansion is presently only a study funded by ST3. That study hasn’t yet occurred and there is no information about it. It is important one, though. The long range plan was consequentially changed in 2014 by an amendment put forward by the then-Pierce County executive, changing it from Downtown Tacoma, which had otherwise been the formal light rail terminus here since 1987 (which is how we got Tacoma Link after the failed 1995 vote). The expansion to the Mall could come in the form of the T Line or Central Link, so the TCC project should be understood in a larger framework for how we develop our system. That is absolutely not the case at this time.

          Sound Transit 4 will one day come, and we now have a programmed light railway to the Mall that could be funded by it. It is indeed a long ways away.

       9. > This is probably a dumb question but will the Tacoma ST area have the money to build light rail to Tacoma Dome?

          If you are curious about the numbers

          https://www.soundtransit.org/sites/default/files/20160901-2015-subarea-report-for-2009-2023.pdf#page=13

          has an example. The subarea bring in tax revenue (i’ll exclude grants for now). Over the past 15 years

          * North king 3.5 billion
          * east king 2.9 billion
          * pierce 2.0 billion
          * south king 1.7 billion
          * snohomish 1.4 billion

          Tacome dome link was in 2022 estimated to cost 4 billion but estimates were revised upwards to 4.6 billion (estimated in 2023 dollars)
          South sounder is estimated at 1.4 billion and an additional 0.5 billion for the dupont extension.

          https://www.soundtransit.org/sites/default/files/documents/2023-annual-program-review.pdf

          Currently pierce county has a billion saved up in the sound transit funds as well, since it spends a lot less over the past decade compared to the tax revenue collected.

          > Will the Tacoma area have the money to build light rail to Tacoma Mall or downtown? I know it is a long ways off. Where will it get that money? Would it need a new levy. Would the new levy be just for the Tacoma area

          There’s a couple options Tacoma has. a) to delay/cancel sounder capacity extensions. I’m not sure how popular it will be but could also just be forced if bnsf doesn’t allow changes/more trains to be ran. b) could run a lot more at-grade portions on pacific highway. The current plan is to build it elevated for around an 8 mile segment, which is definitely not cheap and where most of the link money is going towards.

          https://www.soundtransit.org/system-expansion/tacoma-dome-link-extension

          For tacoma mall the estimated cost was 1 billion dollars (2014) https://www.soundtransit.org/sites/default/files/S-05_Tacoma%20Dome%20Station%20to%20Tacoma%20Mall%20_FTemp.pdf

       10. “The City of Tacoma has taken the ballot representative alignment of 19th Street and run with it, which effectively avoids a proper corridor and transit system analysis.”

           If ST avoids a proper alternatives analysis, that would be grounds to deny a federal grant or overturn the EIS. I didn’t know 6th Avenue was in scope or a potential alternative. If it is, activists should push for it to at least be studied. Lynnwood Link had alternatives as wide as Aurora, 15th Ave NE, and Lake City Way. The only mandate was to serve the Lynnwood and Northgate regional centers. In the third T-Line phase, it could be argued that the only mandate is to serve TCC, and 6th Avenue could do it as well as 19th.

           However, with phase 2 going down MLK to 19th, a 6th Avenue alternative would have to bypass that segment. If the third phase wasn’t expecting to double frequency, that would lead to half-frequency on the MLK and 6th branches and reducing MLK service. If baseline MLK service is 12-20 minutes (which is already marginal), that would lead to 24-40 minutes on each branch, in which case the service wouldn’t be effective.

       11. As the Tacoma Link projects are in existing impacted rights-of-way, they generally do not require complex environmental analysis.

           The original Tacoma Link Light Rail project got an EIS as it was the first light rail project of Sound Transit, and certainly the biggest transit capital project in Tacoma at the time. The subsequent Hilltop Project got a Categorical Exclusion, which streamlines the process dramatically and avoids the scrutiny of more intense categories of environmental review. The TCC extension will almost certainly go through NEPA as it will likely receive federal funds, but the scope of the project could avoid an EIS and undergo an Environmental Assessment. If it moves forward with an EA, the only corridor analysis it will need to conduct is of the representative alignment that has become the project’s de facto alignment, and a no-build option to compare its mpact. If the City, ST, and the FTA do move forward with an EIS, 6th Avenue would *then* likely be evaluated as an alternative corridor.

           This is my understanding of the options available to us, and someone should chime in to correct me as needed. A lot is at stake as we enter a stage of conceptual planning where decisions and inertia have a lasting impact on the evolution of the project.

           With regards to operations, it could easily be served with two lines: one from the Dome to TCC, the other from Dome to Hilltop. 10 or 12 minute headways on both, with 5 or 6 minute frequencies where they overlap in the densest residential and employment districts in the South Sound. Cross-platform transfers between them. Frequencies can go lower, too. If ST4 builds a T Line extension to the Mall, it would become a two-line system anyway. At that point, we could have a line from TCC to the Dome (or the Puyallup’s Tribe’s new commercial district), as well as Hilltop to Tacoma Mall (or beyond to Lakewood).

           Finally, 6th Avenue was Sound Transit’s representative alignment for the line to TCC under the 2005 Long Range Plan. When ST2 was approved, however, it originally only had enough funds for an extension to Tacoma General Hospital and no farther. For some reason—perhaps a minimum spending requirement or some cash infusion—it was determined that a longer railway could be afforded and was now needed. Well, it was the Tacoma City Council that chose to move forward with an MLK alignment, and that same council, 15 months after endorsing that alignment, published a letter accepting either a 6th Avenue or 19th Street extension to TCC. The very council that selected the Hilltop alignment, which now has tracks approaching 19th Street, did not believe that 19th Street was a preordained extension of their own railway. No corridor analysis was ever done after this time, and Sound Transit represented the connection to TCC by simply connecting the dots. If 19th Street and 6th Avenue rail infrastructure can be delivered at roughly the same cost, then the option should be looked at.

           What Pierce County needs is an actual railway plan. No more piecemeal approaches to building a system.

       12. “Sorry for so many dumb questions.”

           Not dumb at all; that’s what we’re here for. There are always new readers coming in who may not know these things either.

           “will the Tacoma ST area have the money to build light rail to Tacoma Dome?”

           Tacoma Dome is relatively inexpensive because it’s all elevated in existing public right of way. Pierce has been saving up since ST1 for it, since it couldn’t build it until Central Link reached Federal Way. ST2 Link ended at 272nd because South King couldn’t afford 320th, then in the 2008 recession it was truncated to Angle Lake, then later re-extended to MLK.

           So Pierce can probably afford to open Tacoma Dome on time (as adjusted by the general ST3 reset, and any delays in the Federal Way viaduct). Snohomish will have a harder time with Everett/Paine, and North King with Ballard/DSTT2, because they both stretched the budget originally, and now Ballard/DSTT2 has cost overruns and the desire for a Ship Canal tunnel.

           “I know a lot of the ST areas are having problems with less tax revenue or increasing project costs.”

           That’s mostly local city governments. They’re constrained by a state law that limits base tax growth to 1%, below inflation. Everything else has to go through levies. The current problems with the transit agencies are due to the driver shortage, maintenance-worker shortage, and supply-chain delays, not money. Eventually the agencies may have to cut due to work-from-home and the end of Covid funds, but so far they haven’t announced anything. Sound Transit is in the best shape because it has such a large tax base.

           “Can other ST areas like Seattle help Tacoma out?”

           ST can borrow from other subareas temporarily, but at the end the subarea’s funds have to benefit the subarea.

           “Doesn’t Tacoma have to pay 1/2 of the second tunnel in downtown Seattle?”

           The downtown tunnels are a “system cost” borne by all subareas. I think the formula is the number of trains in both tunnels going to the subarea.

           “How much will that cost?”

           That won’t be known until he DSTT2 EIS is finished and ST selects projects for construction. It’s currently around $5 billion I think, but I could be off. Pierce would only pay part of that.

           “Will the Tacoma area have the money to build light rail to Tacoma Mall or downtown? … Where will it get that money? Would it need a new levy. Would the new levy be just for the Tacoma area?”

           It’s not in ST3, so the funding would have to come from something beyond that. ST4 hasn’t been designed yet, so we don’t know what would be in it. A Tacoma Mall extension hasn’t been studied yet, so we don’t know what it would cost; we can just guess. ST hasn’t shown any interest in a downtown Tacoma extension. (Troy has suggested one on Pacific Avenue.)

           All ST# taxes must be the same tax rate and duration across all subareas, because it’s a single tax district. For ST3, ST got from the legislature authorization to raise the equivalent of the combined ST 1/2/3 tax streams. That will be maxed out until ST3 is finished and the bonds substantially paid down, sometime in the 2040s or 50s. To do more before then, ST would have to ask the legislature for additional tax authority. The public might balk because the combined 1/2/3 level is already high, and even many transit fans are having doubts about how DSTT2/Ballard, West Seattle, and Everett/Paine are going. The legislature might balk because it already made a concession for ST3, and legislators may be nonplussed at how ST3 expanded 33% beyond the size the legislature expected (in order to fit Everett and Ballard in and keep West Seattle in).

           “Does anyone know why ST chose Tacoma Mall?”

           Pierce boardmembers made it up in 2014, seemingly out of the blue. It’s to support a planned regional growth center at Tacoma Mall, like the Spring District or Totem Lake, and encourage development investment there. Tacoma chose to channel its mandated growth to Tacoma Mall to keep it out of the single-family neighborhoods and avoid upzoning downtown Tacoma further.

           “If the Tacoma area will never have the money to build light rail past the T Dome why are people arguing over it (and I have no idea whether the Mall or downtown is better although there is the T Line which I don’t think is great).”

           We don’t know whether Pierce will have the money because no concrete project has been proposed or cost-estimated yet, and we don’t know what Pierce’s economy will be like in the 2040s or 2050s. The official ST concept is a Central Link extension to Tacoma Mall. Troy is suggesting to extend the T Line instead. The T-Line would cost less because it’s one small car instead of four large cars, and it has substantial portions in mixed-traffic lanes which is a no-no for Central Link.

       13. “10 or 12 minute headways on both, with 5 or 6 minute frequencies where they overlap”

           Was that included in the ST3 budget? Or was it just to extend the line without increasing frequency? To double the frequency, you’d have to buy more trains and pay for the operations.

       14. “as adjusted by the general ST3 reset”

           The ST3 reset was due to hitting the debt ceiling from the late 2020s to the early 2030s. There’s a hard state-mandated ceiling, and a lower self-imposed ceiling. Tacoma Dome was originally going to open in 2030; it’s now scheduled for 2035.

           The reset also back-loaded certain projects to the end, and those happen to be the least-justifiable projects (TCC, Issaquah Link, P&Rs). So ST could easily chop them off if it later decides not to extend the full capital-tax rate much beyond the original 2041. (Or was it 2039?) That means, if there’s no ST4, then when construction ends and the bonds are substantially paid down, the taxes will automatically be rolled back 2/3 to cover operations, fleet replacement, and the remaining debt.

       15. A 6th Avenue line would require additional trams and operating funds beyond the single line using 19th Street, but it isn’t clear by how many or how much. And while money doesn’t grow on trees, it isn’t a far-fetched ask to seek a robust operation over our billion dollar Tacoma railway system. We can secure funding for the few million needed for each extra tram—peanuts, comparatively. We can pay the extra millions to operate
           them. Furthermore, the 19th Street project scope presumes some very high frequencies itself, so operational costs may not be particularly divergent. I believe these options should be on the table and evaluated.

           Finally, while I did once propose an expansion of Central Link to Tacoma’s city center via Pacific Avenue (the Central Tacoma Link Extension, or CTLE), it was more a protest of the plans to extend Central Link to the Tacoma Mall—and a reaction to buses being deviated or truncated at the Dome. I was soon tipped-off by a senior local planner that Tacoma Link was planned and built to be an integral part of Central Link, which at the time sounded like a rumor. Wasn’t it always just a streetcar? Since then, I have reviewed and scanned hundreds of Tacoma Link documents that are not available online, spoken with planners and representatives affiliated with this first light rail project, and confirmed the tip. I became a project historian in some sense—its been fun.

           I now believe it is logical to convert the T Line to a physical standard that is compatible with Central Link, which had been the long range plan for when the railways joined. Sound Transit’s light rail vehicles should be the same dimension—compatible widths at least—whether they have mixed street running or exclusive rights-of-way, as they are in Charlotte’s system. It had been the position of the staff of the City of Tacoma to reject any expansion of Tacoma Link before this conversion could take place—a reflection of the opinion of City leadership at the time—but this was forgotten just a few years later. Hilltop Link preserved the old vehicle standard. We don’t even have level boarding here, which is remarkable.

           Anyway, a modernized version of a T Line integration is explained if you click on my name. Ultimately, I’d settle for a Central Link ending at the Dome and a 6th Avenue T Line extension to TCC. All the local buses should continue to go Downtown. That was long, sorry!

       16. Thanks, I was going to design an ideal regional transit network for Pierce County, since nobody else was doing it based on transit best practices, but I was hindered in not knowing that much about the area or its travel patterns. Now you have done so. If you can send an introductory paragraph on your plan to the contact address, we can incorporate into an open thread or Pierce-related article.

       17. Thanks for all the answers everyone. Pretty complicated for me but I guess the take away is Pierce won’t get light rail for at least another ten years. Typical Pierce. Pay for everyone else’s light rail when it was affordable to build including for another ten years.

           As a regular Pierce Shmo it seems to me Pierce spends all its money on transit trying to get people out of Pierce, probably because they want Seattle workers who make more to move here. Everything has to be about Seattle and its money.

           I’d like to see more transit to get Pierce folks to Tacoma. I don’t work in Seattle. I don’t want to spend the time to drive or take transit to Seattle or Bellevue that are to fancy and expensive for my tastes.

           I don’t think you can live without a car in Pierce. A transit grid is probably unrealistic in Pierce. Like most in Pierce I have a local dive tavern and small grocery store close by in a strip mall. When I want to go out to shop or visit a better bar I want to go to Tacoma.

           There is still enough free parking in Tacoma. Driving to the Dome to catch T Line seems like a tourist thing to do to me.

           I just wish there was more transit from Pierce to Tacoma, not Pierce to Seattle or Bellevue or even the podunk cities like Auburn or Sumner or Federal way. But Pierce is always chasing the Seattle money, and it has made folks in the local housing game a lot of money. Maybe Tacoma doesn’t want a bunch of Pierce Shmos coming there now that it has gone Seattle fancy, or thinks it has.

       18. > I just wish there was more transit from Pierce to Tacoma, not Pierce to Seattle or Bellevue or even the podunk cities like Auburn or Sumner or Federal way. But Pierce is always chasing the Seattle money, and it has made folks in the local housing game a lot of money. Maybe Tacoma doesn’t want a bunch of Pierce Shmos coming there now that it has gone Seattle fancy, or thinks it has.

           I don’t know what region of pierce you live in, but that was the original goal behind the Pierce BRT before it was cancelled. Though hopefully they move forward with the other brt’s

           https://www.piercetransit.org/brt-expansion-study/ (click on “Download June 29th Open House Presentation (PDF)” on the bottom of the page)

           Corridor A: Downtown Tacoma to Lakewood (current Route 2).
           Corridor B: Downtown Tacoma to Lakewood (current Route 3).
           Corridor C: Puyallup to Sunrise (part of current Route 402).
           Corridor D: Lakewood to Pierce College (current Route 4).

           I definitely agree some of the sound transit money should just help implement these bus corridors first rather than waiting another decade for the Tacoma dome link which also wouldn’t help any of these areas.

       19. “Pay for everyone else’s light rail when it was affordable to build including for another ten years.”

           Pierce didn’t pay for other counties’ light rail; that’s what subarea equity was established to prevent. At most there may have been intra-subarea borrowings, which are paid back each phase. Otherwise the money was sitting in an account waiting for the Tacoma Dome project to start. DSTT1 had already been built by King County, so it just needed adaption for Link, and I don’t know whether Pierce contributed to that.

           “Pierce spends all its money on transit trying to get people out of Pierce,”

           Sound Transit is regional transit, and most of the region and the largest cities are outside Pierce, so it offers mostly Pierce-King transit. When the 578 initially went to Tacoma, there were few riders on the Puyallup-Tacoma segment, so it was truncated in Puyallup in a recession. ST offers Sounder service between Sumner, Puyallup, Tacoma, and Lakewood, and ST Express service between Tacoma and Lakewood.

           Pierce Transit’s service is all within Pierce County, except a couple routes to the Federal Way and Auburn transfer hubs.

           The Pierce Transit service area was contracted in the 2010s to exclude the far southeast (beyond Puyallup and Spanaway) because they kept voting no on levies that would have increased bus service. So if you’re living there, you have no local transit service, and Sound Transit is focused on connecting those areas to Sounder. They’re also low-population areas, so they can’t expect to be high in ST’s priorities. ST does have a long-term goal of north-south service to Orting, but that would be sometime in ST4 or later.

           “A transit grid is probably unrealistic in Pierce.”

           Pierce Transit has more of a grid than Metro does. There are several routes that go north-south in western Tacoma, and east-west in southern Tacoma/Lakewood. What it doesn’t have is frequency. That’s what makes it difficult to get around without a car, especially the 2-seat rides the grid offers.

           So the solution is frequency. That means PT needs to use its unused sales-tax authority to increase service. It contracted the service area to help levies succeed (since both Tacoma and Lakewood tend to vote yes for it), but then inexplicably it has not called for a levy since then.

           Sound Transit is mostly out of this. ST’s Pierce priorities, as defined by its Pierce boardmembers (which are also Tacoma and other cities’ mayors and the Pierce executive), are service to King County: Tacoma Dome Link to the airport, and Sounder. Many of us (including me) think this is misguided, and ST’s Pierce resources should be focused mostly on connecting Pierce cities together, and frequent bus feeders to Federal Way Station, and maybe cancel Sounder south of Auburn. But it’s Pierce politicians who are opposing this.

           “There is still enough free parking in Tacoma. Driving to the Dome to catch T Line seems like a tourist thing to do to me.”

           I don’t think Tacoma Dome P&R is intended for that. It’s for people driving to Sounder/express buses/future Central Link to King County. The T-Line serves it for Sounder+T and Link+T transfers.

           “I just wish there was more transit from Pierce to Tacoma”

           From where in particular?

13. We’ve gotten out of the habit of putting “($)” on links to paywalled sites that sometimes have a limited number of free articles per month. How important is this still? Are people more used to checking the link to see if it’s a paywalled site or not caring, or do you really miss the “($)”? We’ve had a lot of non-free articles recently, because subscribe to the Seattle Times and New York Times so I post a lot of links from there, and lately I’ve been forgetting the “($)”‘s.

    1. I’ve been trying to post ($) on articles that I remember having a paywall for non-subscribers, but I don’t catch all of them. I’ve also been trying to make it somewhat clear where each link is going, which lends itself the opportunity to tag a paywall or not.

    2. Not essential, but I find it helpful. Thank you

    3. The Seattle Public Library has online access to the Seattle Times, along with some other popular paywalled periodicals. Generally you can find articles just by plugging in the title and putting in a sensible date range, noting that sometimes the published date isn’t the same date as the print date (often the case with articles in the Sunday edition).

14. the Northwest Progressive Institute has posted a full video of the 2 Line Starter Line opening ceremony, including speeches by various VIPs: https://www.nwprogressive.org/weblog/2024/04/watch-the-2-line-ribbon-cutting-speaking-program-and-read-comments-from-regional-leaders-on-light-rails-eastside-debut.html

15. As the US reindustrializes after the peak of globalization, rising tensions with China and Russia, and Europe’s economic faltering, how much industrial growth is happening in Washington State? Or is it all going to the Sunbelt (non-union, low-tax, transit-challenged)?

    1. Washington’s natural materials are fairly limited to timber and agriculture, but our high ratio of renewable energy production lends itself to manufacturing, especially related to green energy.

       For example, there’s a large battery component plant in Woodinville, and that company is building a second plant in Moses Lake: https://www.axios.com/local/seattle/2024/04/02/group14-ev-battery-lithium-tech-washington

    2. It’ll spread around. Some sectors will value the sunbelt due to lower cost land, etc., while other sectors will value the PNW’s highly skilled workforce and low cost of energy. Sunbelt is good for greenfield projects, while the Midwest will benefit from the many brownfield sites and the existing infrastructure.

16. “The worst bus stop in Seattle” (H/124/131/132 southbound at 3rd &Union) has a new next-arrivak display. The kind with a light background and 6 entries.

    1. Westlake and SODO have the new Link next-arrival platform displays.

17. Was at a bar in Cap Hill last night and several patrons were highly frustrated about the G-line plans. They were upset that 1) Metro has to spend $$$ on new buses specifically for a single bus route and 2) the length of construction on Madison.

    The more I see how jacked up the street is and the time it has taken, the more I’m against Metro’s concept of RapidRide and how they’re going about it. I’m not anti-BRT but Metro’s version seems to be a waste of funds that could be better spent.

    1. The transit-priority lanes should give 5-minute travel time from 1st to Broadway, and 5 more from Broadway to MLK. That’s far better than Capitol Hill/First Hill/Madison Valley has ever had.

       There’s a growing movement to stop building RapidRide lines and instead spend the resources on incremental improvements to regular routes, like SDOT is doing with the 40’s streets. The I (Renton-Kent-Auburn) would still be finished because it’s about to start construction, and the J (Eastlake) because it’s in late planning, but the K (Kirkland) and R (Rainier) corridors could be switched to a 40-like paradigm. The 7 already has some of the improvements done by SDOT.

       1. I’d rather call it “more transit plus” rather than “stop rapidride” as the latter sounds like stopping bus lanes and other enhancements.

    2. @Jordan,

       Ya. It is sort of amazing to me how long it is taking and how disruptive it has been. SDOT/Metro are teaching a master class in how not to do things.

       And, at the end of the day, it is still just a RapidRide line. Crazy.

    3. If you guys are wondering what takes so long, it’s always moving the utilities. For streetcar/center median bus lanes you need to move the utilities out from under the lane.

       And then while moving them they just opt to replace the water/sewage pipeline at the same time, but it does make it seem like the bus project takes a lot longer.

       The actual bus items usually only take one year

       For example rapidride J. They are preparing to do the same thing.

       > During the street rebuilds, Seattle Public Utilities will replace 8,900 feet of old water pipes, for a separate $28 million budget covered by ratepayers, while some $5 million in streetlight replacement is also planned.

       https://www.columbian.com/news/2024/jan/28/federal-government-awards-64m-to-start-new-rapidride-bus-project-in-seattle/

       1. Yes, this. If you’ve seen the slides for the G you can see how much they emphasize the water and sewer lines. If you think of this as “just a bus project” you might wonder why they are focusing so much on the water and sewer system. Because it isn’t really. From a work standpoint it is *mostly* a utilities project, and only partly a bus project. To be clear, the G had some additional utilities work that had to be done to avoid the buses being stuck in traffic. They made the street wider in a couple places and this meant moving the utility poles, but that is minor compared to what they did under the ground.

          Same goes for sidewalks. Quite often sidewalks and sewer work go together. They may need to do some sewer work so they add sidewalks when they are done. To the neighborhood they see “Sidewalks!” and get excited as the work begins. Then all they see is big holes and pipes for months. Eventually, after the big diggers and trucks carrying pipes leave they start work on the sidewalks and it goes fairly quickly.

          Something similar is this project. I’m really excited about it. They started a few months ago and I figured it would go quickly. Yes, they have to do some additional paving and move the utility poles around (and add traffic lights) but that shouldn’t take that long. Once I saw them dig up the street I knew it would take a while (unfortunately). They seem to be done with that phase though, so I think the whole thing should be ready soon.

          It is also worth noting that the various equipment and workers are not sitting around, waiting to do this job or that one. They are juggling them. They may do electrical work over here one day and electrical work over there the next. Thus a project may sit idol while waiting for the next phase. You don’t have to do it that way. You can focus on minimizing neighborhood churn, but that just means we wait much longer for the various projects to be completed.

       2. To add – it’s not like they’re rebuilding the street for fun. Most of Seattle’s streets are literally broken beyond repair, and so when there’s an opportunity to use someone else’s money (e.g. the FTA) to pay to tear out the shattered asphalt base and install miles of 18+ inch reinforced concrete along the bus route under the guise of “we need to upgrade the street to handle these oh-so-heavy buses”, then they’re gonna do it. For example, the structural base of Market street in Ballard is completely ruined, and SDOT was planning to rebuilt Market street in 2020-2021 but they delayed to prevent further impacts to the business core during a time of great uncertainty. Now, they’re likely to try to wrap it into some other transit project or fold it into the misguided Missing Link alternative along Market, so they can try to get some grant funds for it since construction costs have gone through the roof.

          Once a roadway is being completely torn up for replacement, it would be stupid not to take the opportunity to replace utilities, and while it might extend the overall project timeline a little bit, it’s much better than having the utility company tear up the street again a few years later. I think it’s fairly incontrovertible.

       3. Here’s another fun example

          SF’s Van Ness brt project. Started in 2016 finished utilities in 2020 and then actually started bus construction. The bus construction only took 1 year from early 2020 to mid 2021 and a couple months for testing opening in April 2022.

          ## Roadway and Utility Work Phase:
          > Preparing the roadway for construction
          > Replacing more than 22,000-feet of 1800’s-era water main
          > Building an underground sewer system that could sustain a major earthquake and the impacts of climate change
          > Overhauling the emergency firefighting system that supplies water to over 1,200 fire hydrants
          > Updating streetlights with brighter, more efficient lights and adding sidewalk lighting
          Installing an electrical duct bank that will power the traffic signals and overhead contact system
          > Once the utility work is completed, the sidewalk and roadway will be restored to begin the next phase of construction.

          Then once all of the above was finished they actually actually started on the bus stuff.

          ## Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Build Phase
          Building red center-running Bus Rapid Transit lanes (see features of Bus Rapid Transit below)
          Building station platforms and new medians
          This BRT Build phase will begin as the Roadway and Utility Work phase is wrapping up and will last about six months.

          ## Bus Power, Safety Enhancements and Beautification Phase
          Replacing the aging overhead wire system that powers the buses
          Installing new landscaping and rain gardens
          Repaving Van Ness Avenue for a smoother ride
          Building sidewalk extensions and painting crosswalks that will make streets safer for people walking
          Training operators on the new system

          https://www.sfmta.com/project-updates/construction-information

       4. Great examples.

    4. Let’s be clear about RapidRide G. It was forced upon Metro by the city, who never mentioned it in the 2008 plan but suddenly vaulted it to their preferred project in their 2013-14 plan.

       Then scare transit capital dollars went to rebuild the street. That even includes dollars from ST3.

       That doesn’t even get into the safety problems of having large open spaces inside a gadgetbahn vehicle climbing a steep grade with crowds of standing people as well as a few bicycles in tow .

       I’m not against the project goals, but it frustrates me that transit dollars that could go to putting in a new down escalator at a rail station or even add a sidewalk along a bus route go instead to jackhammering up a street to put in a new sewer line.

       1. @Al S,

          It’s just the fiscal equivalent of logrolling. Anytime anyone shows up with a pot of money everyone attempts to hitch their horse to it and get their pet project funded too. It happened to the CCC, and it happened to the G too.

          But you can bet your bottom dollar that if either of these projects went away, then the bulk of these urgent “needs” would too.

       2. But you can bet your bottom dollar that if either of these projects went away, then the bulk of these urgent “needs” would too.

          Sorry, no. You have it completely backwards. Look at the comment up above for an example: https://seattletransitblog.com/2024/04/30/open-thread-47/#comment-931198. Off the top of your head, which mayor was elected because they would focus on long term maintenance projects? That is right, no one. Hell, it took a major bridge failure before people thought it was a good idea to inspect all the bridges. Not replace them, inspect them. Oh, and we know that some of them need to be replaced, but that keeps being put off. These are bridges!

          In contrast, water/sewer projects ain’t shit (apologies for the pun). If a new bridge gets replaced then it often comes with an improvement. If nothing else it is shiny and new — there is a ribbon cutting even if it is no better than the old bridge. But water and sewer plants are the opposite. The leaders know they need to be done, but they hate doing them. People grumble about the torn up street and when it is all done it is basically the same. Transit — or even bike lanes — are the excuse they use to do what needs to be done (not the other way around).

       3. >Not replace them, inspect them

          Ross, the accelerated cracking of the West Seattle Bridge was only discovered over the course of routine bridge inspections.

          >But you can bet your bottom dollar that if either of these projects went away, then the bulk of these urgent “needs” would too.

          Would you rather subsurface utilities only ever be replaced on an emergency basis?

       4. @Nathan — Yes, the problems with the West Seattle Bridge were found because of an inspection. That particular bridge had problems dating back to 2014, which is why they were inspecting it more often. My point is that the failure (perhaps ironically) led to an audit of all the bridges as well as the the bridge maintenance (and inspection) process. After that bridge shutdown, the city council paid for an audit. This was one of the findings:

          SDOT does not currently calculate the useful life of its bridges in a precise way, which hinders its ability to efficiently respond to bridge maintenance needs.

          SDOT has not conducted a full analysis to determine the current useful lives of their bridges based on component condition data, which means SDOT does not have this information to inform and prioritize bridge maintenance activities. However, SDOT indicated that they will start reporting condition assessment on a much more granular, component-by-component basis, which could be helpful in developing a more precise estimate of the useful lives of their bridges.

          The report is a good read, and by no means is it a slam against SDOT. It basically shows that SDOT (like most cities around the country) could do a lot better and our bridges are generally in poor conditions. Seattle is unfortunate in that it can’t simply spend a lot of money on maintenance. But it is in the same boat as many, many cities around the country in that there is very little interest in doing so (even if we could). Maintenance isn’t sexy. Maintenance does not (typically) involve a ribbon cutting. There is a general predisposition towards making a system bigger and bigger, even though the maintenance problems increase when you do.

          We see that with our roads, highways and Link. We continue to build new freeways, which means that we will have to spend ever more money maintaining (and inspecting) them. Our subway system will be huge (if it is completed as planned) and yet it will a lot fewer riders per mile. This is not only unusual (most systems get more riders per mile as the network effect kicks in) but it is a maintenance nightmare. Very few people talk about this — they only focus on the next big thing.

18. Metro has to do this asap!

    https://twitter.com/KingCountyMetro/status/1786132586076463136/photo/1

19. More on 3rd Ave and it’s problems:

    https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/why-is-seattles-third-avenue-not-recovering-it-just-might-be-the-buses/

    While I wouldn’t necessarily equate buses with drug use, clearly the sheer number of buses on 3rd is having a negative impact on the entire street. When nobody wants to be on 3rd because of a wall of buses with chaotic skip-stop spacing it makes it hard to run a business. And when businesses close, the drugs and the squalor move in.

    Westneat comments on how many buses use 3rd and how important it is, but he doesn’t mention that the buses that do use 3rd aren’t that full. Metro is clearly underperforming our peer cities when it comes to pax/bus.

    Clearly something must be done. I’m just not sure putting cars back on 3rd is the answer.

    1. Danny Westneat doing his best to troll the Seattle Times readers. A quick glance at the comment section shows it’s working. He offers no evidence to support his hypothesis (just that the other streets “seem to be recovering” better than Third). No look at the history (how long have buses been on Third?). None of that.

       To be fair, I think a couplet (half the buses on Second or Fourth) would be good. But the idea that the buses themselves is the problem is absurd.

    2. It looks like a slow news day, so Westneat is rehashing an old controversy. In the end, he says practically nothing. The headline asks whether buses are the problem; some people make absurd arguments to assert they are; and then Westneat says maybe yes, maybe no.

       The most obvious counterargument is that the buses travel all of 3rd Avenue, but only a few stops have crowds of dodgy “businessmen”. Those are the stops closest to the department stores and McDonald’s, or in the office-only ghetto. So it’s just as likely the sellers are there because that’s where the most potential customers are. In other words, the department stores, the buses, and the dodgy sellers are at 3rd & Pine all for the same reason. Further south, the problem is that the office-only ghetto leaves a ghost town after 5pm or now with work-from-home. Then there’s another thing that happened in 2020: the rise of fentanyl.None of this is the buses’ fault.

       The argument that only car drivers buy things downtown, or that only car drivers on 3rd Avenue can save 3rd Avenue, is ridiculous. Downtown Seattle is the place where people are LEAST likely to park on the street in front of a shop/restaurant and pop into it. I just can’t see people parking on 3rd to get a slice of pizza from the former Bruno’s, or to pop into Ross and buy some slacks.

    3. I don’t get equating homeless and crime with buses. It seems to be a suburban bias that just flat out wrong.

       First of all, buses are just pieces of metal and glass. Cutting the number in half doesn’t change the street any more than cutting traffic volumes would reduce crime.

       And many Third Ave buses are trolley buses. No exhaust! No loud motors! The create less CO than the private vehicle fleet does.

       I read this as more as “code” not for buses but for bus riders. So that to me is indicative of a racist bias. While both bus riders and homeless are more often people of color, they aren’t the same people — even though these protected suburban types think that they are.

       Perhaps the only connection is about loitering. I do notice that bus shelters around the city have those not boarding buses and instead doing something nefarious. Then if questioned, they proclaim “I’m waiting for a bus!” even though they aren’t.

       So before we start spending millions digging up the street, maybe we should instead rethink the streetscape environment today. They could install high intensity lighting. They could create paid fare zones on the sidewalk. They could put more foot patrols there and reduce the number of police that are driving to patrol.

       I’m facetiously expecting them to whine that darkness is also a problem and that we need to increase the hours of sunlight to save Third Avenue next!

       And people living in private vehicles is a huge issue across Seattle. It pervades many neighborhoods.

    4. Lazarus is complaining about the size and pollution of the bus vehicles, and the large presence of ten of them together. The Downtown Seattle Association sometimes mentions that. Westneat’s article is more on the lack of cars and street parking, which supposedly allows businesses to exist, and that bus vehicles somehow cause drug dealers and hot-goods salesmen to congregate there. I didn’t get a sense he’s talking about bus passengers.

    5. “just that the other streets “seem to be recovering” better than Third”

       Second and Forth have less pedestrians, period, and long have. They’re more large office buildings with less retail or things for pedestrians to go to, so pedestrians don’t spend time there. Since there fewer total pedestrians, there are fewer drug dealers.

    6. People say the same thing about buses on the Ave, that they cause Ave rats to concentrate. But buses travel the whole length of the street, and the miscreants are concentrated only at the 43rd, 45th, and 47th stops. There are a lot more buses on 15th, and nobody concentrates there. So miscreants concentrate where the human crossroads are, regardless of whether there are buses, and they don’t concentrate at all bus stops.

    7. The article doesn’t make sense. People in cars are not crime-deterring “eyes on the street” like pedestrians are.

20. Protest at UW Station. “Due to protests, the University of Washington Station is closed. Access into and out of the station is restricted at this time… passengers may exit at Capitol Hill Station or University District Station and use the Link Shuttle Bus to travel to University of Washington Station.”

    1. ST’s messaging confused me. Were trains terminating at Cap Hill? Or were trains going all the way to Northgate but simply rolling through UW Station.

       “Link Shuttle buses are replacing the 1 Ln between U District Sta & Capitol Hill until further notice:

       My sister flew into Seatac at that time tonight. Our original plan was for me to pick her up at Northgate. But based on ST’s messaging I drove to the airport to get her.

Comments are closed.