WSDOT

Six months ago we reported that the communities of Maple Valley, Covington, and Black Diamond were looking at the possibility of commuter rail to connect themselves with the Auburn Sounder station.

Last month, WSDOT released ridership estimates using PSRC’s travel demand model.  These preliminary numbers suggest rail would draw 1,200 daily riders, while peak bus service using an “enhanced” 149 and 168, in addition to a “conceptual express route from Maple Valley/Covington to the Auburn Sounder Station” comes up with 3,800 riders.

It seems plausible that serving these low-density communities might not be economic for rail.  Meanwhile, Brian tells me BNSF is muttering about closing Stampede Pass, which would render this whole discussion irrelevant anyway.

36 Replies to “Preliminary Maple Valley Report Favors Buses over Rail”

  1. More demand from feeders (bus or train) to Sounder should spur demand for more Sounder trains running daily…something we all want.

  2. The Kent-Covington-Maple Valley corridor is a classic auto-and-asphalt-dependant, 1966-style self-metastasising suburban strip mall boom town area that will be absorbing a lot of road building tax dollars over the next decades if it continues to grow in the same way it’s grown over the last 25 years. Transit is virtually non-existant in that area and trafffic congestion is a huge problem, especially in peak commute hours. How much will it cost to build more and more roads to meet traffic demand compared to how much will it cost to rebuild the rail line? I can’t find any link to the study other than the summary provided by WSDOT, but I’m interested to see what consideration is given to the costs needed to maintain motoring mobility in the corridor if a “no-build” option is chosen. If you’ve ever been in that area during commute hours, three enhanced Metro routes won’t do much to ease the congestion.

    If BNSF wants to mothball Stampede Pass again it might make the Maple Valley rail line more feasible as a commuter rail line because there wouldn’t be any conflict with freight trains and light weight rail vehicles could be used. Or perhaps some Sounder trains could be directly routed onto the Maple Valley line which might increase ridership. Re-building the rail line will be expensive, however. Most of the rail in that area is joined stick rail, stations would have to be built and some sort of signal system will have to be installed. Those are expensive items.

    1. A Northwest High Speed Rail Authority could take over the Stampede Pass corridor and adapt it for use for high speed trains to Eastern Washington. I don’t think we’ll ever need commuter rail service along there, even in the very long term rapid buses or rapid streetcars along the major arterials should be enough.

      1. Speaking of, did anyone else realize McGinn was just in BC signing a high-speed rail agreement?

        “Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson, Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn and Portland Mayor Sam Adams have signed a protocol agreement that will unite the three major cities in the push to secure a high-speed railway service through the Pacific Northwest region.”

        http://www.vancouverobserver.com/blogs/cityhall/2010/06/09/vancouver-seattle-and-portland-sign-pact-push-high-speed-rail

        1. Interesting. The Canadians need to spend some money on the rail line north of the border though, it is one of the slower parts of the Amtrak Cascades trip to Vancouver. My guess is that the Mayor of Vancouver favors spending money, but where that will come from who knows.

        2. And also, get the Canadian government to fully support the service so that there’s no more squabbles over who will pay for the customs inspections.

        4. No, the middle part isn’t excruciating. From Colebrook to the Fraser Bridge – the bulk of the trip north of the border – speeds are on par with the Fairhaven-Bellingham-Ferndale section. It’s the White Rock and Vancouver sections that are a disgrace. The 1.6 miles from Pacific Central to Commercial/Broadway take an average of 15 minutes to traverse…

          Between Blaine and Colebrook, 10-30mph.
          From Colebrook to the Fraser Bridge, 40-65mph.
          From Fraser bridge to Commercial/Broadway, 25-50mph.
          **From Commercial/Broadway to Pacific Central, it’s between 3-5mph.**

      2. Track geometry will pretty much preclude anything going high speed over Stampede Pass (too many curves, too much altitude) unless somebody wants to spend a lot of money. But there would be the possibility of a conventional rail line to Ellensburg, Yakima and the Tri-Cities from Seattle and Auburn. The line could be timed to connect with the Empire Builder in Pasco.

        1. I used to be for restoring the old North Coast Hiawatha all the way to Minneapolis at least, but willing to think out of the box to keep Stampede going, your suggestion should be worth looking into at least.

        2. It would probably have to go slow over the pass, but it has to get over the mountains somehow, and however it does it’s going to go slow. But then on this side and the other side of the pass the tracks can be redone and all grade crossings eliminated so it can be real 150mph+ HSR. A line from Seattle to Ellensburg to Yakima to Tri-Cities to Spokane mostly at 200mph could, even including the slow segment over the pass and a few stops, make the whole trip in two or three hours. It would be expensive but super useful for the state.

        3. I don’t think so. It follows the Yakima River Valley which is far from straight. If you try to follow I-82 you have two grades that are so steep semis barely make it over. It makes more sense for Tri Cities to be connected to Portland by rail than to Seattle.

        4. Once you cross the Cascades you’re halfway to tri-cities — if you’re going slow the first 100 miles I really don’t see how you get to Spokane in 3 hours. And I don’t think we should make the investment to serve eastern WA with 150+ HSR before we have a plan to serve the I-5 corridor at that speed — right now there is a $6 billion plan to connect Portland, Seattle, and Vancouver with 110 mph service, you’re proposing something far more costly to serve much fewer people.

          I do think we should attempt passenger service on this route, though, and maybe gradually improve it if people actually ride it.

        5. Alki Tours runs the Christmas Trains to Leavenworth. I would think Walla Walla would be able to generate enough interest to run two or three (maybe more) Wine Trains on special weekends. It appears the trains to Leavenworth are contracted from Amtrak. I’m guessing they must have extra rolling stock on weekends to be able to provide this special tourist service. I don’t know how much work is involved in pulling the track out of mothballs. I’d guess they want to keep it always at the ready in case they have a closure of Stevens pass for any length of time. I’d also be curious to know if they would have to ventilate the tunnel if only one or two trains a day use it.

        6. Oh yeah I definitely think super high speed rail from Vancouver to Portland is the first priority, but down the road we should definitely be looking at a cross-Washington route.

    2. I would rather see a LINK light rail track built that goes from

      Seattle
      Renton Highlands
      Benson
      East Hill 104th
      Kent-Kangley
      Covington
      Maple Valley

      The roads such as 108th are wide enough that they could have a road diet and add a LINK lane and also better sidewalks and a bicycle-only pathway.

      1. I think the line down to Renton is something that should be on the radar for the near future, but it shouldn’t be extended down into the exurbs down there (Covington and Maple Valley) unless they incorporate a big effort to greatly upzone all station areas. Right now it’s just spread out auto-oriented hell.

      2. I’d say put rail wherever the suburbanites want it, the more the better. As long as the proposal goes to the neighborhood centers and other strategic locations, and not in inconvenient locations in order to be away from people who don’t want trains near them. The inner suburbs have all gotten the message about densifying their centers; this would prove whether the exurbs are ready to establish centers.

        Bailo’s line would have to end at Renton because otherwise it would duplicate the Burien-Renton line and central Link, and we’d have the equivalent of “inefficient one-seat rides” on rail. The Burien-Renton line could continue southeast, but it would more likely continue north to Bellevue because that’s where the most population and ridership is. But a spur from Renton would be possible.

        This would bypass downtown Kent, however. I’m not sure we should reward east Kent sprawl while dissing downtown Kent (with its new dense growth and the ShoWare Center and the courthouse and jail) again. But it would make a case for BRT from central Link to Kent to east Kent.

        1. I think there should definitely be a Seattle-Renton line, possibly via SODO and Georgetown. It should meet up with the Burien-Renton line in Downtown Renton, which should continue all the way up the general 405 corridor to Bellevue, Kirkland, Bothell, and Lynnwood. The best thing for Kent would be expanded Sounder operations, which could be made possible by a future (probably quite expensive) extra track or two owned by ST along the BNSF ROW. BRT or, possibly Link/rapid streetcar, should definitely be considered from the Des Moines waterfront to Highline CC Link to Downtown Kent to Kent East Hill.

        2. Agreed. Most of Kent doesn’t have the density to warrant LRT. There are some high density locations along Kent-Kangely Road and 104th Avenue that would provide ample ridership if there was BRT west to Downtown Kent or north to the future Renton LRT station. It’s just unfortunate that the local leadership here hasn’t encouraged more density and more frequent bus service along these corridors.

        3. Actually, 256th and Kent Kangley is the second densest region in Puget Sound and King County. Second only to lower Queen Anne.

        4. How could that possibly be true? I just looked it up on Google Maps and it’s a Rite Aid and Old Country Buffet.

        5. It’s funny when you make these ridiculous statements. Ever been to Capitol Hill, the U District, Belltown, First Hill, etc?

      3. How would the Covington and Maple Valley portions paid for? Those areas are currently outside Sound Transit’s service area.

        1. The study was commissioned by these cities, not by ST. The service would probably be provided by an entirely new transit operator, although contracting with ST or Metro would be the best.

    2. The fancy legal term ad-hominem refers to WSDOT directors’ dishonesty and subservience to automobile-related business interests. Some Seattlers love that sort of defining character in smiling public employees as they’re told to bend over.

  4. And it was not so long ago that the Milwaukee Road rails were being ripped up through Maple Valley…

    1. In hindsight, that was a mistake. although perhaps if our transportation planners had been familiar with the Lightweight DMUs from Europe, or the Karlsruhe TramTrain, might have seen the rails stay, or even be improved.

      1. The problem was those tracks were a slow single track, with multiple ungated crossings, designed to haul timber and coal out of the area. It’s now an excellent bicycle path. But it is still connected land and in some distant future could be replaced with dual LR track.

        1. I know that most new lines are double-tracked, but I was thinking perhaps forgo the double track at first, until traffic builds up, and then perhaps consider double-tracking as part of a redesign of SR169. Use Karlsruhe and Kassel as a baseline, though.

  5. WSDOT is not a public agency. It is wholly owned and operated by automobile-related business interests on their behalf, in their pursuit of establishing a transportation monopoly of “cars only”, by institutionalizing severe impediment to walking, bicycling and mass transit, especially rail-based mass transit.

Comments are closed.