In 1969, Colorado created a regional transportation district around Denver, Minnesota created a transit authority in Duluth, and the Port Authority Transit Corporation (PATCO) was created in Philadelphia.

PATCO’s Speedline opened that year, with 14.2 miles of track and ridership of just over 21,000. Link will do a bit better than that in 69 days!

45 Replies to “69 Days”

  1. Has there been any kind of published estimates on where Link riders are coming from? For example: 5% will be new riders to public transit, 15% will be former route 42 riders, 17% will be former 194 riders, 4% will be former route 36 riders, and so on. I know Sound Transit must have researched that. I’d like to see that breakdown.

    1. I believe that at first, it’s around 50/50 from existing transit users and new transit users.

      But the answer to your question changes with time. The development happening around the stations results in the new user share climbing, percentage-wise, over time, until it’s more like 80% or even higher.

    2. In the Environmental Assessment for the Link Initial Segment issued by the Federal Transit Administration in 2002, the daily ridership forecast for 2020 is 42,500 of which 16,000 would be new riders on transit. Sound Transit confirmed this number in the ST Environmental Assessment Response to Comments pg. 22 point A. This is based on computer modeling of a 2020 region with and without Link in operation. Transit ridership with Link minus transit ridership without Link equals 16,000 per day.

      Riders equals train boardings.

      To my knowledge, no further analysis of light rail ridership related to present day bus route patronage was ever done.

      However, a 2004 Link Operations plan document by ST provides a breakdown of where the 42,500 in 2020 would board (from before the addition of Royal Brougham Station):

      Westlake: 8,600
      University Street: 6,900
      Pioneer Square: 2,700
      Int’l District: 4,400
      Lander: 1,700
      Beacon Hill: 3,200
      McClellan: 3,300
      Edmunds: 2,900
      Othello: 1,500
      Henderson: 2,000
      South 154th: 5,000
      Total: 42,600 (sic, my calculator says the total is 42,200, but this is what is printed in the source document — rounding error probably)

      When actual ridership comes in, we’ll see how these forecasts look.

      Perhaps a Sound Transit official has an updated forecast.

  2. What is the ridership estimate for link 1?

    the only thing I can find is 100k/day in 2020, but i’m guessing that includes the North link to Northgate and East Link to Redmond…

    The wikipedia article is erroneous, it references current ridership, which only includes Tacoma Link.

    1. That 2020 ridership would probably only include U Link.
      Central Link is expected to do something around 25,000 in 2010 (obviously not that much in 2009, as we start halfway through).

  3. 100k is for when U-link is done I believe. The short little segment from downtown to the U-district will almost triple ridership. For now, the original segment is something like 40k

    1. We’ll never actually see that 40k number – that’s the 2020 number for only central link, as if U-link were never built. First full year should be something like 25k on average.

    1. It’s not just ‘some people say’. It’s that they have to use FTA modeling that doesn’t take into account many sources of ridership – like new development.

      The SLUT is a great example, at some 30% higher than projected ridership.

      1. How many are fare paying rides? Spending money on something nobody would use if they had to pay for it isn’t so great. Maybe when Orca is in full use we’ll be able to know how many passenger miles the SLUT actually provides for the money spent. I don’t travel downtown during peak but whenever I’ve been there I see the SLUT but it’s never had more an a handful of people on it.

      2. Every time I’ve seen it within a hour of peak time and during lunch, it’s had almost all of its seats full. And the great majority of Metro riders use a pass too, they don’t pay each time.

      3. How many people do you know actually have a monthly monorail pass? My guess is not many. And just like the monorail, the SLUT is not enough to attract riders all on its own. Most of the people who ride the SLUT are transfer and pass riders who would be riding the bus anyway.

      4. eeepc, other than perhaps the Whole Foods, the development those people are going to wouldn’t have happened without the SLUT.

      6. All the development that is happening as a result of the upzoning we couldn’t have gotten agreement for without the SLUT?

      7. I use the SLUT to make trips that I wouldn’t ordinarily make. The streetcar has made it a lot easier to make trips to downtown for meetings or lunch. I also use it for the last mile of my commute because it is more reliable than the #70. I know quite a few people at work who wouldn’t ride the bus that ride the SLUT during the day to run errands and go to lunch. Just wait till Amazon moves in, I bet ridership will easily be 5000 a day.

      8. I’d say 2500 in the year after Amazon opens – we’re at 1400 now, and most of those Amazon employees don’t live in the city!

        I use the SLUT to make trips I wouldn’t otherwise have made. I use it to get from downtown to Glazer’s, but previously I would have walked rather than take the bus.

      9. Yeah, I used to ride the 212 with a lot of Amazon employees. Half of the bus would empty at the IDS. Now all those people will be getting off at Westlake and probably transferring to the SLUT.

      10. I keep hearing the “wait till Amazon moves in” refrain. So what? Those aren’t new jobs. They are a relocation of jobs from around the city; most notably Beacon Hill. This just bears out the concerns of those who thought it foolish to bend over backwards to appease one developer at the expense of the rest of the city.

        The cost of SLUT to increase the luncheon choices of a few white collar workers downtown doesn’t really seem to justify it’s operational budget, let alone is capital cost.

      11. Well, once Amazon moves in you’ll have more foot traffic which will then realize more businesses such as restaurants, etc. In addition, Amazon employees can take light rail to the SLUT, whereas right now the transit options to Amazon aren’t that great.

        I wonder what sort of roads you classify as being built for white collar workers going to luncheons?

      12. Centralizing jobs from throughout the region has no reasonable benefit in your mind? Focusing development in an area that isn’t far-flung King County isn’t a reasonable thing in your mind? Consolidating transportation options isn’t a reasonable thing your mind?

        And your classism is pretty hilarious, considering that it’s the typical truncheon against all transit (buses are for poor people, light rail is for snobs on capitol hill, etc.).

        Remember: “costs too much, does too little” is the squawking of Kemper Freeman Jr., et. al.; aping them only gives their argument a bit more oomph.

      13. Bernie, the landowners in South Lake Union paid for the construction and a lot of them pay sponsorships to cover operating costs. So your point is what? You would rather have Amazon consolidate their offices in the suburbs where it would be impossible to serve with transit? How much would that cost taxpayers?

      14. Bernie, when Amazon moves in, the spaces Amazon is vacating in other parts of downtown don’t go away.

      15. SLUT was 1/2 payed for by a LID. A great deal for Vulcan as they don’t have to cover operating costs. I’ve seen nothing saying they contribute to that. And, I think next year the City weasels off the hook and sticks Metro with the operating cost.

        There are already more jobs in the downtown core than people. That’s why there’s a peak hour crush. YES, more jobs in the “far flung suburbs” are exactly what’s needed to balance out the ratio of jobs to where the people are. The amount of housing that’s part of SLU doesn’t keep pace with the number of jobs and a lot of those people are just going to be reverse commuting to the suburbs anyway.

        Again, this is a relocation of jobs. For every restaurant that gains business in SLU another in the city is losing. It’s like cell phone marketing where the emphasis is on getting people to switch carriers instead of keeping the customers they have.

        SLU would develop with or without the SLUT and when it does a streetcar might make sense. Amazon is moving from the PacMed building and Union Station (plus a lot of other downtown space). Instead of improving options to the PacMed building which is surrounded by housing that would appeal to biotech workers the City decided to help out Vulcan fill empty cubicles in an area that was already well served.

        As far as trains for rich folk and buses for the poor that’s proving to be true. Folks that would have walked rather than bus ride SLUT. Eastlink probably will pull in a lot of white collar that wouldn’t ride the bus; especially inner city tranist. That’s not good or bad it’s just a fact. If trains make sense, like U-Link that’s great but SLUT is nothing but a demonstration run. An amusement park ride to attract clients to new office and condo space. The waterfront streetcar would have done much more to help existing business and would have to cost less to reinstall and operate. The difference? No deep pocket investor and contributor to champion the waterfront tolley.

      16. The SLUT had 500k riders last year, while the Waterfront streetcar had 400k during its last year in operation. Given that SLU has yet to reach its full potential and Link isn’t even open yet, I think ridership will only continue to expand. I think everyone admits that SLU was a test line showing that a streetcar could work in Seattle, and that the biggest payoffs will come with the First Hill and First Ave lines.

      17. “The amount of housing that’s part of SLU doesn’t keep pace with the number of jobs and a lot of those people are just going to be reverse commuting to the suburbs anyway.”

        Your circular logic never fails to amaze me.

      19. SLU has thousands of units of new housing, including condos (2200, Veer), apts (Alcyone, Alley24) and low-income (Lakeview, Denny Park). If you want to take a walking tour email me with yahoo at joshuadfranklin. The goal is for SLU to have as much housing as jobs if not more and is going for LEED-ND as well. Obviously Vulcan as a major landowner benefits, but so do people who get to live in a walkable neighborhood. There is a lot of hope that Northgate, Interbay, and other areas will also be great places to live and work.

        I for one would love to live in SLU and we’ve been keeping an eye out. I have to say the transit service is pretty limited, even including the trolley. However, I’m coming from the perspective of living in the U-District.

      20. It’s your logic that’s circular. You imply that there’s not enough housing for people who will work in SLU, but there’s enough to draw people to the neighborhood that don’t work in SLU. And the streetcar runs both directions, so it serves reverse commuters anyways.

        One-quarter, approximately $500,000, of the SLUT’s operating budget comes from sponsorships. And yes, Metro will be paying to operate it starting this fall. The hours will be coming from bus hours that were already going to be allocated to the city for bus service. I just don’t see how the city investing in transportation infrastructure is “bending over backwards” for developers, especially since $0 came from the city’s general fund to pay for it.

      21. The issue is jobs vs where people live. There’s way more jobs downtown than housing. SLU development creates more office space (potential for employment, not jobs) than it’s going to provide in housing. Even if it did have a 50/50 split it still doesn’t address the existing imbalance.

        The PacMed Building which Amazon is vacating is going to be hard pressed to find a replacement client given the recent bubble of building. It will I believe end up being converted to condos (something that has been considered before). What will be ironic is people living there and driving to work at SLU. Even more so since SLU was billed as a biotech haven (complete with special tax breaks) yet the PacMed building would be perfect for that type of client.

        I not aware of the 1/2 million in sponsorships. Are you counting employer paid transit passes from businesses in SLU? Even if it’s “only” 1-1/2 million it’s an expensive substitute for walking or bus service that actually goes somewhere. Half the capital cost came from a LID; the other half was financed by the people of Seattle. Going forward taxpayers are on the hook for not just the operations but all of the cost for expansion. All of which means money not available elsewhere.

      22. Actually the other half came from the Feds and from some property the city sold. And no, I’m not talking about subsidized bus passes. Businesses pay to sponsor stops and to advertise on the streetcars, to the tune of $500,000 per year.

        Your argument still holds no water. Amazon was going to move out of PacMed and consolidate their offices no matter what. They chose to do it responsibly by locating in an urban area that is already served by multiple modes of transportation instead of moving to the suburbs where new roads and highways would have to be built, at taxpayer expense and adding to sprawl, to serve them. Even if Amazon were the sole beneficiary of the streetcar, which it isn’t, I think the small operating subsidy is a small price to pay for keeping 10,000 jobs in the city.

      23. I find $500,000 in advertising revenue for the SLUT hard to swallow. Metro estimates total ad revenue potential from the entire DSTT at $230,000 annually. It claims it will lose $743,000 in full-wrap bus advertising program on 25 buses ($450,000 if restricted to partial wrap because of concerns expressed by some passengers that their views were obscured and the bus interiors were dark). I know streetcars are cute but not that cute.

        Amazon was looking to consolidate but there’s no reason to believe they would have pulled out of the PacMed building. There was adjacent land that was available for development. They also could have moved into the space vacated by WaMu and had room to spare. The operating costs for the first few years are a small price for the City to pay to keep Amazon from moving to the suburbs since all of King County is now on the hook for the bill. I have to admit that was a cagey move by Nickels and company.

      24. Except WaMu hadn’t gone under when they made the decision.

        “The operating costs for the first few years are a small price for the City to pay to keep Amazon from moving to the suburbs since all of King County is now on the hook for the bill.”

        So? Couldn’t you say that about any bus route? The hours were going to be allocated to Seattle anyways, the city decided to use them for the streetcar. Big deal.

        http://seattlestreetcar.org/about/docs/faqCosts.pdf

      25. Bernie, it’s clear you don’t like the SLUT, OK? I get it. Personally I like it and that’s good since I actually use it since it does go places I need to be (specifically UW SLU and the Hutch). The 500k is sponsorships. If you go to one of the stations there’s signage that says “Seattle Children’s Research Institute Station” and so on. It’s like Qwest Field. Why would PacMed be perfect for biotech? There are no institutions like the Hutch or SBRI that I know of up there. Biotech buildings cost an insane amount of money due to lab safety requirements.

      26. PacMed was identified as being good for Biotech because of the power upgrades that have been done and the high ceilings for lab use.

      27. The sponsorships mentioned in the PDF were proposed and the operating costs were projected to be $500,000. The reality in the Metro budget was $2.1, it doesn’t say where the money came from.

        It’s interesting that the City sells property in SLU then invests the money to drive up the price of the property it just sold. That seems like a bit wasteful of public dollars doesn’t it?

  5. I still don’t see how that’s going to be.

    There isn’t enough high-density development in the MLK corridor. Most of the housing within 6 blocks of MLK is single family housing with larger than postage stamp lawns. There are some (mostly vacant) TOD-like structures especially near Alaska street and there’s the fairly well developed (though again, mostly single family) Holly Park area near Othello street.

    Most 174 passengers are likely to continue on the 124 rather than pay the Link fare. Of course, some will say “heck, i’ll just ride Link down to MLK and not bother paying” but that will dissipate fairly quickly once the public realizes that there are sheriff’s deputies enforcing fares.

    If the Link stops were closer together, then I could fathom 23-24k in FY 2010 (July 2009-June 2010). But… since
    1. Fares are not integrated with Metro.
    2. Stops are spaced too far apart.
    3. Bus routes are planned to serve the system peripherally.

    I do not expect for there to be more than 17-18k passengers. And that is with Airport Link opening.

    BTW, I don’t think the Airport extension will open in December. They’ve still got a lot of structural work to do, especially with the walkway connection to the terminal.

    Brian Bradford
    Olympia, WA

    1. If the stops were spaced closer together, less people would ride it because it would be too slow. And still, everywhere in the Rainier Valley there is within a half-mile of a Link stop. It will get a lot of riders. And a lot of the riders on the 174 wouldn’t care about Link fare because they have passes for more than that amount.

    3. So what you’re saying is that people will take the 124 instead, diversifying transit choices in the region?

      Oh woes.

      1. What happens now is some passengers will hop off the 174 going northbound at Sea-Tac and catch a 194, if they see one sitting there.

        The assumption most seem to make is that will translate to the Link. I don’t think so.

        If Metro does something questionable to what I think they will, that is put 40ft coaches on the 124, it will cause some passengers to choose to ride Link, just so they can get a seat.

        But you will find the bus congested with passengers who for whatever reason won’t ride Link.

        Like I said, excepting intra-Downtown ridership, Link won’t get more than 18k the first fiscal year. Just look at the ridership on the 42/48 combo on MLK, then add about 80% of the 194 ridership. Of course, the 194 doesn’t get cut until February 2010, maybe its unfair to be that generous.

        Once University Link opens, then you’ll see 40-50k because of the higher densities and the speed component. But that’ll be passengers deboarding Downtown or the Airport, you won’t likely see too many getting off on MLK.

        Brian Bradford
        Olympia, WA

  6. Ha I just saw that Michael McGinn says that the No on Roads-and-Transit campaign in 2007 was outspent 100 to 1. He says the no campaign only spent $5000.

    2. Uh, yeah, the guy should check PDC filings before he says things like that.

Comments are closed.