73 Replies to ““I don’t want your trains in our city.””

  1. Sounds like Scottsdale City Hall’s attitude about metro Phoenix’ new train…very backward in thought and vision…

    1. To be fair, it’s not really the same thing as objecting to a local transit system; Amtrak isn’t planned to *stop* in Lakewood, I don’t think, so from their point of view, they don’t benefit.

      1. It’s pretty bad NIMBYism. Lakewood was one of the first “cities” in the state to get through rail traffic. Rail traffic is way down on the old Prairie Line from those days, but the small number of Amtrak trains that will pass through everyday is hardly disruptive.

        I’d trust WSDOT on this one – they’ve done far more analysis and are more technically savvy then the Lakewood City Council.

      2. Agreed.

        Next week: the Councilman calls for an end to commuter flights from Seattle to Portland because they don’t have a layover in Lakewood.

      3. You folks really need to stop it with the NIMBYism knee jerk response to anyone who disagrees with you – they have the right to do so and you’d be better off respecting them and figuring out what the issues are – at least at the beginning.

        There are 7 at grade crossings in Lakewood that already create backup problems, especially in the Fort Lewis area. There is no freight on this line at this time, but that could happen at some point in the future, a concern for us in Tacoma as well.

        Heavy rail is second fiddle for both WSDOT and Sound Transit and I’d be careful about making assertions of technical savvy without actually reading the analysis!

        That said, this is an existing rail corridor so the precedent is established. Likely the only thing they could be angling for is grade seperated crossings, but couldn’t say for sure.

      4. Really, these crossings create backup problems? Do you happen to have city traffic studies handy, or is this just your assertion?

        Also, why exactly is the Amtrak service an issue, but the 18 Sounder trains a day didn’t really garner a response at all, despite having several public meetings?

      5. There is some freight on the line, it just isn’t very frequent. I saw a Tacoma Rail Locomotive pulling some cars on 10/24 when I went down to Olympia.

      6. Absolute NIMBYism. The proof is that Lakewood is happy to get the 18 Sounder trains, but doesn’t want the eight additional Amtrak trains?!?!

        Please note that on the current plans, the Amtrak trains from the South will stop in Tacoma, and it will be possible to change trains at Freighthouse Square for a Sounder train back to Lakewood. And the trip for the Amtrak trains to Tacoma will be six minutes shorter than currently, and more reliable.

        Also, the move to a shared station with Sounder will allow straightforward train changes at Tacoma for Cascades heading north, which would otherwise require a crazy walking transfer across fast Tacoma streets.

        Lakewood is getting benefits from the byapss.

      7. So, if I don’t have a rail stop in my neighborhood – or a freeway off-ramp – I should be opposing anything which doesn’t directly benefit me?

        I don’t think that’s a fair way to look at any transportation project.

        Lakewood exists, in many ways, because of heavy rail. Someday they might get a station if ST expands to Olympia.

        It’s stupid to try and oppose something that’s already a done deal.

  2. Hmm. If he thinks trains are annoying, tell him to allow cars in “his” city and see how he likes that! Oh wait… he probably already has that. If so, we can assume he visits all auto collision victims in the hospital, and volunteers his children to fight in the oil & gas-pipeline wars.

  3. Judging by the WSDOT map, the bypass would cut out one of the most scenic parts of the trip between Seattle/Tacoma and Portland.

      1. The Amtrak between Seattle and Portland is not some scenic day-trip. It is a vital connection between to burgeoning metropolises. Unfortunately… Amtrak is too f%@#-ing slow.

        Build the NW high-speed rail! Build the Puget Sound an inter-suburban rail network. But most of all, build Seattle a subway system!

        Seattle needs to become more rail-centric.

      2. Under ideal conditions, the time saved is 6 minutes, but when trains overload track, travel through Tacoma can add another 10 minutes. As for high-speed rail, non-electrified Talgo trains are perfectly suitable. They could run on the discontinued Amtrak Pioneer route past Boise to Salt Lake City and junction with Amtrak Zephyr. I prefer the Pioneer terminus at SLC, not Denver.

      3. While I suppose it could be faster, I don’t think the Cascades travel time between SEA and PDX is all that bad.

        Sure, IF traffic is with you, you can make it between the two cities much quicker. However, the last time I drove, It took me 45 minutes to get from downtown Portland to Vancouver. Once I got past Olympia, I spent another hour crawling through the Nisqually/Fort Lewis area. Then I got stuck again by Boeing Field.

        If there’s one thing I hate, it’s getting stuck in traffic, because it’s totally unproductive time, where on the train you can read, or have a snack, or watch a movie, and getting me there is somebody else’s problem.

      4. As a Seattle Amtrak conductor let me tell you. There are grown adults that are beside themselves and ready to curse and throw a tantrumif they don’t sit on the water side. When we do seat assignments about 75% of people ask for water side seats and well half the people can’t get it and they make it known that they are unhappy. It’s a little annoying at times. I understand wanting to sit on the water side but you can still see from both sides of the train and well you are still going wherever you need to go which should be the most important thing.

      5. Yeah. Most of the time that’s the first place people go and it fills up. I suggest it to them but for some people that’s not good enough. Although the bistro was empty this morning coming up to Vancouver.

        You can’t please all of the people all of the time I guess.

      6. That’s funny. In the evenings, I prefer not to sit on the water side because the sun is always right in my eyes. But then I ride Amtrak enough that I’ve seen it before. Pretty yes, but often I’m already engrossed in a movie on my laptop (which is another thing you can’t do in a car!)

      7. Better than that – it also allows for a further five minute reduction when we upgrade to 110mph operation. Since it’ll be the first section of track we own instead of BNSF, it’ll probably also be the cheapest to upgrade.

      8. Agreed, but even better than that, it vastly improves the on-time performance (from 60 to over 90%)for many of the trains that get “traffic jammed” going the long way around. It just makes sense on so many levels.

      9. The bypass decision is made, though the loss of scenery is an unfortunate factor. At issue now is design – creating a corridor that is respectful of traffic patterns and adjacent land uses. They have every right to lobby for the best possible design they can get.

      10. Where, exactly, are they lobbying for a design change? It doesn’t look like they’re doing that.

      11. Shouldn’t Lakewood be responsible for grade separation since the railway was there a long time before any of the streets were? Lakewoood is the one that mucked up a perfectly good railway by building streets over top of it.

      12. In Palo Alto, they’re arguing the rail authority should spend a ton of money to bury Caltrain tracks to “reconnect the neighborhood”. Even though the railroad existed a good 75 years before the neighborhood in question did.

        That said, grade separation is a really, really good idea. A lot of people seem to think that being hit by a train is a good way to commit suicide, which is a tragedy from a humanist perspective, traumatic for engineers, and a huge pain for the transit authority. Grade separation makes it much, much harder to people to set themselves up for train-assisted-suicide.

    1. Only southbound, though. If I recall correctly.

      Unfortunately, transportation isn’t always about aesthetics.

      1. There’s a thin line being walked here. Aesthetics are nice, and should be included when reasonably possible, but the Pt. D bypass isn’t an issue of planning; it’s an engineering problem. The Pt. Defiance tunnel is old and only a single track, and has a reduced speed limit so forget about upgrades/retrofits for high-speed. It must accommodate freight traffic to/from points south of Tacoma in addition to Amtrak. This includes heavy freight traffic into and out of the Ports of Tacoma and Seattle. It’s not that it isn’t a pretty part of the trip – the existing infrastructure simply can’t take it.

      2. Yes, not sure where that idea came from either – scenic northbound and non scenic southbound doesn’t make sense. Perhaps Lakewood would like to expand its scenic attractions so that it becomes the new scenic! There are challenges everywhere.

    2. Yep, enjoy the view from Amtrak while you can. Of course the view north of Seattle will still be the same, and it is both longer and better, but if your trip is to the south….

      On the flip side however, there will now be relatively fast trains paralleling a stretch of freeway that sees some pretty bad congestion on a regular basis – that is good advertizing for mass transit.

    3. That most scenic part is also the biggest bottleneck and slide prone area of the route between Portland and Seattle. If we want a real, functional, multi-train corridor, we have to accept some trade offs.

      As for Lakewood, both the bases that cause it to exist have pretty enlightened leadership, so I’m surprised they haven’t weighed in in favor of this. Anything that might be used to reduce the traffic into the bases – like expanded Sounder Service – would probably be attractive to them.

      1. I agree with Lakewood (poster, not the City)

        I would also think that a stop at Lakewood would be beneficial to the City of Lakewood but I know Dupont has been more on WSDOT’s agenda than Lakewood.

        Trains, especially the Cascades or the Coast Starlight (or future Pioneer) would not disturb traffic. Passenger trains at speed will take about 50 seconds (from the activation of the gates to the lights going back off)

        The talk about the line being near a school is a just a method of trying to scare folks. Amtrak, Sounder, and BNSF both run at speed by/near 4 schools of all ranges. If WSDOT is willing to install wayside horns and such to minimize the sound impact of trains blowing through town, they should embrace this since it cost so much to install.

        With a proper education among the citizens of Lakewood and neighboring communities, congestion will not change at all with Amtrak or Sounder. If Lakewood really sees this as an issue, they should apply for funding to start building new overpasses and grade separation. 50 seconds is no longer than most lights nowadays. So far, Lakewood has no base to complain besides the normal scare tactics.

      2. I’ll add also, if the military base wants to reduce traffic and congestion, they’ll put up the money for some type of transit service to and from Lakewood station. I keep hearing that they are looking at purchasing some electric powered buses but haven’t heard anything yet.

      3. Brian,
        Is there any chance perhaps limited runs, like maybe a weekend Coast Starlight (Starlight Limited :-) could still use the old route along the Narrows or does the change to the Freighthouse Square Station preclude that? I bet the last couple of runs on the old line are going to be packed.

      4. Bernie,

        Since the old Tacoma Station will be torn down, the use of passenger rail via the old line won’t be able to happen anymore. BNSF already has plans to use the old lead for a yard expansion.

      5. Mmm, too bad. Not the old station being torn down, a yard lead will be more asthetically pleasing :^) but never being able to access “the scenic route”. Where does the track north of Freighthouse Square rejoin the BNSF mainline? I’m sure it wouldn’t warrant regular service but would special trains light the Daylight Special be able to take the old line and possibly stop in Steilacoom? Speaking of which, it’s been years since I’ve been in Steilacoom. I heard the boathouse at Salters Point burned recently. Is the old Depot near the ferry landing still waiting to be preserved?

      6. I expect the “scenic route” would be used only for chartered excursion trains (and rarely, at that, since it’s so crowded) — and, of course, if there’s some accident which closes the Lakewood route.

        (Because the current Tacoma station is going away, if there is such an accident, trains will bypass Tacoma and head directly to Tukwila, or Seattle in the case of the Coast Starlight.)

      7. A Lakewood/Fort Lewis stop is a good idea, and they should at a minimum be doing some conceptual planning and evaluating land aquisition strategies.

        Personally, I think they should pull commuter rail away from Sound Transit and expand the service area to include Olympia and Bellingham, plus maybe Bremerton and Wenatchee.

      8. They did do conceptual planning – Lakewood rejected it. If Lakewood wants a station, they will have to say “we want a station” instead of “we don’t want your trains”.

      9. How exactly would commuter rail to Bremerton work? The tracks take a rather rounabout route from the BNSF/UP mainline.

      10. Maybe Sound Transit could invest in ferries with rails on board instead of car parking spots. According to Wikipedia, train ferries do exist.

      11. Lakewood = car country.

        It’s going to take a long time for them to exit the Interstate Era, and see the value in passenger rail.

        Many of the opponents to the Pt. Defiance bypass project cite “loss of parking” within the rail right of way. As in, businesses which have been freeloading on BN/ST right of way for years, and now feel entitled to it.

  4. Just to throw in a few cents here, the advantages to this writer of the bypass are three fold:

    Shorter track time between Seattle and Portland – six mins is significant.

    Amtrak and Sounder only trains on a long stretch of the route as no freight trains will use it. This lessens the risk of disruption and a major improvement over the current mess in and around Tacoma using the existing route.

    The chance for Amtrak to move out from its boring and tatty current station in Tacoma to Freighthouse Square which is much more becoming a spot for travelers to make use of before and after their trips.

    I hope that Lakewood will reconsider its concerns and look to the greater good here.

  5. This is why it takes Seattle so long to build rail lines. Seattle needs an undergroung subway network ASAP. But it’ll take Seattle forever if we keep delaying everything. Stop debating!!!!! And built us a subway system!!!!!!

    1. Your post makes no sense. We’re talking about longer range heavy rail with diesel locomotives (Amtrak, Sounder), not light rail.

    2. Your post makes no sense — we are talking about Lakewood mucking up the process here. Lakewood is not Seattle — in fact, Lakewood isn’t even in the same county as Seattle.

      A true subway system in Seattle is not in the cards due to cost. I would however advocate that any “Green Line” LR system serving WS and Ballard be built to Central Link standards (4 car trains, underground through DT Seattle, etc).

      But we are talking about Sounder here and not LR (or subway) anyhow.

      1. How is Link not “a true subway system” between International Dist. station and Roosevelt? Yes, not heavy rail; not third rail, but every bit a subway.

  6. I’m sure Lakewood is after something else from WSDOT. This is just posturing on their part to draw better cards for the hand they have.
    Look at Tacoma. They just got another 2.5 mil out of ST for the berm issue.

    1. A land owner got 2.5 Million, roughly a 30% bump. Alternative proposals for the berm may actually save money, and lead to better design.

      Claudia Thomas from the Lakewood Council is on the Sound Transit Board and a proponent of speeding up construction, to the chagrin of Tacoma folks. Likely the Lakewood opponent’s calculus includes some regional political considerations as well as attempts to increase spending on grade seperated overpasses.

      1. All the alternative proposals suggested increase cost in two ways – higher construction cost, and significant (multi-million) grant losses due to delay.

    2. Lakewood can’t withold permits, can they? Do they even have permitting authority when it comes to railroads?

  7. City Councilman Don Anderson said areas such as Tillicum have traffic problems without trains. He and Mayor Doug Richardson said the plan unfairly affects low-income neighborhoods along the tracks.

    I know Gravelly Lake is grade separated with the tracks in a retained cut. South of there it boards the Tacoma Country Club. Not exactly low-income and I’d bet a source of more political “complaints” than Tillicum. Aren’t the two Tillicum access roads also grade separated the same as Gravelly Lake?

    Jim Taylor, a member of the Tillicum-Woodbrook Neighborhood Association, said the bypass project is the most serious issue in the neighborhood’s history, and that the state made a hasty decision to allow passenger trains.

    I’d say McChord closing access to Woodbrook on Gravelly Lake Dr. would have been a much bigger deal than trains running parallel to I-5. Although that did make the Woodbrook Neighborhood a lot quieter and safer.

    I can see Lakewood wanting a stop. At least one Cascades trip south in the morning and north in the evening. I heard Lacey is in danger of being closed. I’ve seen a lot of military equipment on that line. I suppose the Army will be able to do what they please regardless of who owns the track? Any chance of a station being located in Dupont?

    1. I know at least one of the Tillicum crossings is at-grade, and I believe the other is too.

      Military equipment gets loaded on post at Ft. Lewis and goes to either the Port of Tacoma or Yakima.

      1. I’ve seen long trains of flat cars loaded with Humvees and other equipment sitting on the siding by Camp Murry. The tracks through McChord I don’t think have been used for years. they locked off the gate by the NORAD building years ago. Not sure if they still run trains into the Logistics Center but I’m sure they want to keep access to that. I’m guessing to get to the Yakima Firing Range they’d want to use Stampede if possible but how do you get to Auburn? I’m guessing that presently they use the tracks to go south and then back up and around Pt Defiance? I’d bet BNSF would rather route that north on the new bypass.

      2. Maybe they could have a new Fort Lewis Sounder line where you get to ride in Humvees and Strykers loaded onto rail cars.

  8. People have mentioned a couple of times that a Ft. Lewis stop could help reduce congestion at the base, but I am not sure how that work. Considering the odd hours (we had to be there at 5:45 in the morning, and got released… whenever) I can’t see any soldiers able to use it. Not to mention the problems with security. Possibly some civilian contractors, but again, you are stuck with the issue of security. Currently the closest transit can get to Lewis is a bus stop at the gas station right outside Madigan Gate.

  9. Oh and if anyone is wondering what commuting in hell is like, it is living in Bellevue while being stationed at Lewis. It is a very good thing they don’t let us take our weapons home. LOL

  10. There seem to be a number of misconceptions about the concerns expressed by the Lakewood City Council. Though it is true that there is absolutely no direct benefit to Lakewood from the Pt. Defiance Bypass project, this is not just a NIMBY response. There are some very legitimate concerns that WSDOT has not addressed.

    While Seattle argues for tunnels and Tacoma had 90 public meetings over the location, design and appearance of the M Street grade separation, WSDOT ignored the expressed concerns of the 100,000 residents of Lakewood and the military bases and issued a “Documented Catagorical Exclusion” ignoring the need for a more extensive environmental study and substantial mitigation. Since the mitigation could cost more that the $100,000,000 estimate for the extension, residents of Lakewood can very rationally feel they are being “railroaded” by WSDOT in the rush to obtain federal funds for an otherwise unfunded project with minimal benefit to the transportation grid.

    Lakewood has a beautiful train station. However it still does not have the trains Sound Transit promised in 1996. If we are lucky, the Sounder may get there by 2012. We have been paying Sound Transit tax for over a decade with no benefit. Whatever Lakewood residents think of Sound Transit’s delays and cost overruns, the Sounder is a done deal and there is a strong concensus that we want the service. The Sounder runs will only impact three of the seven at grade crossings in Lakewood, none of which are close to I-5.

    The impacted bypass route is the only area of “the corridor” that is not currently a truly active rail line. Tacoma Rail uses it about three times a week to drop off a few rail cars. It has not been active for decades. Virtually no one now living in the area claims to remember when it was. Unlike Puyallup, Auburn and Kent, this is a fundamental change in use.

    Of the seven at grade crossings in Lakewood, one is very near to I-5 on Bridgeport, a gateway exit to the city. Two of the others serve the landlocked Tillicum neighborhood and Ft. Lewis. These exits are daily traffic nightmares due to increased troops at the Fort and the fact that I-5 looses a southbound lane at Tillicum. The Cross-Base Highway project would have restructured one of these exits to create grade separation, but the voter approved funding for that project was “redeployed” to King County (that happens to us a lot).

    Lakewood currently has $20,000,000 in ongoing capital improvement projects. Much of this is focused in areas running parallel to the proposed expansion. Vital commercial redevelopment will be negatively impacted by proximity to an active rail line, right of way expansion and the cancellation of leases.

    It is not just noise, traffic, safety, esthetics and inconvenience, though those are concerns. The project as planned will have multiple negative effects on the quality of life in Lakewood, without any perceptable benefit. If the project is truly necessary “for the greater good,” the greater community should be financially responsible for doing it right and mitigating the impact on our residents. WSDOT has chosen to ignore the impact to attempt to avoid the true cost of the project.

    Don Anderson, Deputy Mayor, City of Lakewood

    1. Thank you Deputy Mayor. While it may be true that WSDOT rushed this through isn’t it also true that the urgency was necessary to secure the “spend it or lose it” dollars now available from D.C? That doesn’t diminish the validity of your concerns but I would hope that this would be the basis for WSDOT to commit to funds to address some of your very valid concerns. Bridgeport for instance definitely needs some help “even without the trains” as was pointed out. Grade separation may be a ways out but money for signal prioritization and other mitigation could/should begin immediately. In other words, there must be a solution that is a win win.

      Your statement that Lakewood has “been paying Sound Transit tax for over a decade with no benefit” is not true. My mother lives in Lakewood and makes frequent use of the Express bus service into Seattle. Building the station is a concrete example of your money at work (and a beautiful station it is).

      Tillicum has grown with demand from the increased military presence. As you state this has created a traffic nightmare. It’s the responsibility of Lakewood as a city to control this development and impose sufficient development fees to mitigate that. The rail line has remained in constant use and there should be no expectation that it would somehow disappear as the region grew.

      As far as the cross base highway a portion of the funds were voted in the last legislate session to be approved even though the project was shelved. What was this spent on if not the initial connections with I-5? This sounds like a local problem independent of the Pt. Defiance bypass project. And the money wasn’t “redeployed” to King County; the expected revenue evaporated with the economic downturn. WSDOT is still funding the I-5 HOV lanes through Tacoma and extensive improvements over Nalley Valley.

    2. Honorable Deputy Mayor Anderson,
      To say Lakewood residents have been paying the Sound Transit tax with no benefit is a slight exaggeration. If I recall, Sound Transit has been providing service from Lakewood since September 1999 with service to Seattle and the Airport. In fact, Lakewood was one of the very first communities to receive service from Sound Transit.

    3. Thank you Mr Deputy Mayor:

      I would only suggest that the wider community is paying for this as WSDOT receives not just state but also federal funding for its operations. It is also true that WSDOT hasn’t exactly pumped a lot of money into rail improvement projects in Washington State down the years but we have a real chance now with the current administration in Washington, DC to try to make up for lost ground in federal and state attention being paid to national rail priorities. We haven’t had such an opportunity for so long now and they do say that fruit should be picked when ripe and that moment is as now as it can be.

      I am sure you do have legitimate concerns in Lakewood, but the rest of us have legitimate concerns in our trains running late or getting stalled on the existing ‘scenic route’ around Point Defiance plus we need more trains as an environmental alternative to driving and flying between Seattle and Portland. Also, if we can expand the number of trainsets on the route, then maybe you will have less polluting cars passing through the Lakewood area. As Sound Transit has built a station in Lakewood, there is the opportunity for you to also ask Amtrak to stop there also. As the BNSF will not be using that corridor, I don’t see that Amtrak would need to negotiate with the railroad for the right to stop there. Sound Transit will get its trains to Lakewood and we know it has been a long time coming. Eventually, it would be nice for them to push down to Du Pont to capture Olympia traffic.

      1. “As Sound Transit has built a station in Lakewood, there is the opportunity for you to also ask Amtrak to stop there also. As the BNSF will not be using that corridor, I don’t see that Amtrak would need to negotiate with the railroad for the right to stop there.”

        In fact, I am sure Sound Transit would be quite happy to allow Amtrak Cascades trains to stop in the already-built Lakewood station. Amtrak would lose less than 2 minutes of runtime, and they’re gaining six minutes plus reliability — so Amtrak could probably be convinced to stop in Lakewood, with the proper lobbying effort.

    4. There is no right-of-way expansion involved. The fact that businesses have been encroaching on the right-of-way for years does not make it a reasonable thing for them to do. Lakewood appears to have created its own problems by introducing development on the wrong side of the tracks — which predate most of the city — without building grade separations.

      A line used three times a week is very much “active”, and the fact that residents have short memories does not change the fact that the line has been potentially highly active for its entire existence. Federal railroad law exists *precisely* to prevent cities like yours from blocking nationally and regionally valuable improvements of railroad service because they’d conveniently “forgotten” that the train line used to have lots of trains on it.

      Furthermore, the current state of the line may have caused confusion among people such as yourself as to the results of putting passenger trains on the line. Slow freight locals block crossings for much longer times and are much less unsightly and much louder than passenger trains.

      Also please see my comments earlier on how Lakewood will indirectly benefit from the Amtrak service.

      If you really want another train station in south Lakewood, which I suspect would *benefit* “vital commercial redvelopment”, we would back you. If you want improved crossings — separated gated pedestrian crossings, or even an overpass — we would understand that too.
      Attempting to degrade service for people coming from as far as Los Angeles on essentially spurious grounds is not attractive.

  11. Forgive me if this has apready been covered elsewhere in the thread…

    On the question of whether the Amtrak bypass “benefits” Lakewood, I would answer yes for the following reasons.

    Lakewood is the second-largest city in Pierce County and one of the fastest growing in the state. It is therefore reasonable to assume there is a market for travel between Lakewood and Tacoma.

    Because Lakewood will be a few minutes from Tacoma via Sounder, Lakewood residents will be able to take morning Sounder trains to the Amtrak station in Tacoma in order to catch a train the Portland.

    The reduced travel time between Tacoma abnd Portland achieved by the bypass makes the “benefit” real for the Amtrak passenger whose origin/destination is Lakewood.

    1. Lakewood residents will be able to take morning Sounder trains to the Amtrak station in Tacoma in order to catch a train the Portland.

      Wouldn’t that be rather absurd to take a northbound train into Tacoma only to get on a southbound train that goes right past the station you just boarded at 30 minutes to an hour earlier? Give that most people are driving they’d just go downtown and use the free parking garage. And if your taking the bus I’d imagine connections to and from downtown are going to be much more plentiful than to Lakewood Station. It seems that Lakewood would warrant at least one southbound morning Cascades stop and one evening return. But I guess if it was a money maker Amtrak would be doing it. How much does it cost to stop and reaccelerate a Talgo?

      1. It seems that Lakewood would warrant at least one southbound morning Cascades stop and one evening return. But I guess if it was a money maker Amtrak would be doing it.

        Currently there is no Amtrak service to Lakewood because no trains currently pass through Lakewood. Once the Pt. Defiance Bypass is in operation then Amtrak may consider putting a stop there.

      2. Well yes but won’t the arrival of Sounder to Lakewood be simultaneous with the switch from using the Pt. Defiance route? I got the impression that Lakewood City Council was complaining about having to deal with Amtrak through traffic and not even getting so much as a single route stopping in Lakewood.

Comments are closed.