Month: October 2010

Despite last year’s moderation of 2008’s record transit ridership, newly released American Community Survey estimates for 2009 show a fair increase in transit commuting share for both Seattle and Bellevue, at 19.5% and 14.2% respectively.  For a comparative breakdown, Eric de Place of Sightline has the rankings between other cities in the region for transit, as well as cycling, walking, carpooling, and working at home.  PubliCola’s observations here.

Seattle 19.5% share scored a modest increase of 1.8 points over 2008, generous compared to Portland’s 11.5% considering the ease of driving there.  It’s not really clear whether or not Link had an influence on the numbers.  When considering the other modes, roughly a third of Seattleites now commute outside of SOV driving.

Bellevue’s share is by far the most surprising at 14.2%.  However, its whopping 6.8 point increase over 2008 could prove to be nothing more than an error.  Nonetheless, when extricating that possibility, there are a few explanations: the city’s growing suburban park-and-ride commuter bases, Downtown Seattle and Bellevue remaining the most likely transit destinations where peak service is good (Bellevue won an award in this department after all), and to a lesser extent more commuters using the Microsoft connector service.

When it comes to bicycling, however, Washington cities lag far behind Oregon with a state-wide share of cycling commuters at an abysmal 0.9%, compared to Oregon’s 2.3%.  The estimates for Seattle are virtually unchanged from 2008 at about 3.0%, while Portland sits easily on top at 5.8% in the big city category.  I wonder why.

Bear in mind that the ACS compiles its data from samples and extrapolation unlike the Census’ full-scale survey model, so not until next year will we get a better idea of actual commuting habits.

Today is the second to last meeting for the Regional Transit Task Force. I haven’t really done this live blogging thing before to we’ll see how this goes.

8:45 – I’m out. The meeting is slowly wrapping up.

8:36 – Rob likes the report. There is lots of specificity about definitions of specific performance measures. Josh Cavanaugh and Jim Stanton agree. People leaving slowly. Meeting is running over time now. The results of this meeting won’t really be known until the discussion at the next meeting.

8:35 – Onto the draft now. Looks like another meeting is necessary.

8:27 – David Freiboth says what is the ask and when to make an effective ask. How much work goes into the ask and what makes an effective ask. If the state wants to move fast this will give Metro the ability know what the ask will be.

8:25 Both Rob and Josh are bring up the point, what if the state is the one pushing a re-organization of transportation funding next year. What happens then. What does Metro try to do then.

8:16 Fred Butler is saying that he thinks that Metro needs to really create a good detailed and sustainable long term funding plan. If Metro does that it will distinguish it’s self from other agencies. Jim Stanton says that he thinks this should really be put in the context of all transit agencies, not just Metro.

8:09 Lots of jokes about drinks. Cool-Aid, Tea, Mikes hard Lemonade. Long story.

8:03 David Freiborth says that he is hearing people running for cover, and not committing to new funding. Grant says that he thinks you can only go to people once you have already implemented changes and made cuts. Only after that point can you ask.

More after the jump.

Continue reading “RTTF Live Blogging”

• New Republican governors may refuse federal passenger rail money.
• Looking at bus lanes on Aurora.
• Commemorating the 545 stop on Capitol Hill.
• Paul Bachtel, ATU president, defends Metro wages.
• Meeting October 13th about redesigning the Smokey Point Transit Center.
• ORCA on the Eastside.
• ST buys Beacon Hill house threatened by void; much more here.
• Road diets are a public health issue.
• Bike commuting up nationwide.  Seattle in third, but far behind Portland; more bike boxes come to Capitol Hill.
• Olympia Transit Center expanding.
• An informal poll on East Link between B2 and B7.
• Kemper Freeman blasts McGinn.  The Mayor responds.
• Cascade Bike Club director Chuck Ayers is out.
• New instructional videos for cyclists using Sound Transit services.
• UW Regents still questioning the design of the University Station overpass.
• A pair of dynamite PubliCola editorials.

This is an open thread.

Like many other transit agencies and local municipalities, Bellevue is facing a budget shortfall of its own, though not as dramatic as say, Sound Transit’s.  Nonetheless, several important transportation projects have fallen under the axe through the city’s Capital Improvement Plan.  The $353 million plan, which delegates funding for capital projects through 2017, strips $29 million of funding for such projects, a few of which could actually be very useful for South Bellevue P&R users.  From the Bellevue Reporter:

More than $29 million of that came in the form of transportation projects, including $6 million that would have went toward neighborhood sidewalks, $5.2 million on 145th Place Southeast and 4.4 million on 108th Avenue SE and Bellevue Way to Interstate 90.

While the original projects weren’t massive non-motorized traffic-calming master plans with cycletracks and road diets, they were part of an Enatai neighborhood program aimed at promoting traffic safety through sidewalks, bike lanes, etc.  Any loss of pedestrian projects in the park and ride’s station buffer is not welcome news for neighborhood non-drivers. The current lack of sidewalks on both 108th and Bellevue Way poses a safety hazard and acts as a major deterrent for residents walking to the park and ride.  Not only such facilities give pedestrians a place to walk, they also help mitigate impacts from traffic.  The future success of a Link station at South Bellevue will depend on whether or not walking/biking are feasible options.

Unfortunately, the city council seems oblivious to these kinds of travesties.  But as the council majority has consistently favored throwing money at fantasy routes over the kind of mitigation South Bellevue neighborhoods need, no one can truly be surprised.  Ironically enough, the defunding of the sidewalks would only add to the already-questionable impacts of the city-pursued A-2 replacement for the park and ride.  Considering that traffic will feed directly from both sidewalk-less Bellevue Way and 108th Ave SE via 113th, I have to question if the new and revised B7 is still truly about “protecting neighborhoods.”

Video by Oran.

PubliCola’s recap of yesterday’s Link light rail rider alerts shows that we either have a train system that is unreliable at providing service or reliable at providing riders messages. Or, more likely, somewhere in-between.

Two of yesterday’s four delays were delayed to buses in the downtown transit tunnel. The joint operations there will likely be a headache for the years to come, but of course Metro would probably like to remind you that there are more bus riders who use the tunnel than Link’s system ridership.

The 520 workgroup released their final recommendations on Friday. Of special interest to those interested with bus operations on the Seattle side are the white papers discussing transit priority and the second bascule bridge.

The not-obvious-yet-crucial consideration is construction of the second bascule bridge, which expands Montlake Blvd. from four to six lanes. The second bridge has always been in the plan, but there was substantial neighborhood opposition to destroying two homes and increasing overall vehicle volumes.

Unless and until that bridge is built, transit/HOV lanes on Montlake Blvd will extend northbound from the 520 offramp to Hamlin St, and the existing southbound lane just below Pacific, but not on the bridge itself. The workgroup looked at going to only 1 general purpose lane on the bridge in each direction, but

After reviewing a VISSIM model showing the existing bridge with an HOV lane in each direction and exploring the challenges related to channelizing HOV lanes in the corridor with such a configuration, the subgroup determined that this option would have significant negative impacts on traffic and transit operations along Montlake Boulevard and SR 520.

There also will be a southbound HOV left turn lane onto the onramp.

WSDOT will install signal priority equipment at four intersections on Montlake Blvd. WSDOT’s analysis indicates that operations improvements will reduce congestion enough that this priority operating them should be unnecessary except during special events. However,  the use of these will ultimately be up to SDOT.

There will be performance measures that trigger construction of the second bridge that are related to the performance of all modes of transportation. If these triggers activate and WSDOT overcomes forthcoming political opposition, only then will the bridge be built. More after the jump.

Continue reading “SR 520 Workgroup Recommends Bus Enhancements”

Dominic Holden asks:

Transit nerds, what do you say? Is light rail [over 520] still unfeasible, totally workable?

Mayor McGinn claims that light rail is still “financially and/or environmentally infeasible”, even after WSDOT’s modifications to “accommodate” light rail. I believe the Mayor is basically correct. However, the modifications have made it somewhat more feasible, and after reading the white paper on the subject, I think the problems are beyond the powers of WSDOT to fix. The reason it is financially infeasible is that no one has a dime to spend on 520 rail. Even a minimal line, from UW station to South Kirkland Park and Ride via Montlake Blvd, would by my rough estimate cost about $800m.*

This is not like I-90, where an entire roadway already designed for rail already exists. On the other hand, WSDOT has at least eliminated the requirement to demolish parts of the span to build rail.

As reported previously, adding rail would require adding supplemental pontoons, which will cost significant money but not otherwise be all that disruptive, except while rails are being installed in the HOV lanes.

WSDOT has to hedge its bets on the cut crossing because no one knows how Sound Transit would attempt this. The four basic options are:

1. A high bridge from Foster Island;
2. A tunnel from Foster Island;
3. Up the HOV ramp and across a third bascule bridge;
4. Up the HOV ramp and at-grade on the second bascule bridge.

More obstacles after the jump. Continue reading “The State of SR 520 Light Rail”

Last night, the Bellevue City Council continued its ceaseless chase of B7, or a new revised version of the alignment.  With the absence of councilmember Chelminiak, who is still recovering from a bear attack, and Lee, an ultimate vote of 3-2 was carried out in favor of a motion that would allow the City to pursue “Phase 1” of a “revised B7” study.  The phase is just one of three, neither of which comes cheap.  The first, costing roughly $670,000 and estimated to take 6-7 months, would be a “concept report” engineering the new alignment to about 5%, the same level as all of the DEIS alternatives.  Goran Sparrman, director of Transportation, made note that Phase 1 would be similar to Sound Transit’s 112th Ave Concept Design Report.

The second phase, costing $450,000 and taking 4-6 months, would build on the first phase and contain a more detailed focus of noise impacts and an environmental review similar to that in Sound Transit’s DEIS.  Sparrman noted that this phase would have similar content to a DEIS, but could not be legally labeled one.  The third and final phase was the granddaddy of them all– costing a whopping $2.5 million over a 12-24 month work period.  Phase 3 would build on the first two phases and include geotechnical work, surveying, and finalization of alignments, all to bring engineering up to the same level as Sound Transit’s preferred B2M– roughly 15%.

You can view the study session packet here (PDF), which has more details of the phases.  The study session will be archived on Bellevue TV soon, which you can then view in its entirety.  More of the meeting below the jump.

Continue reading “Bellevue Spends $670K To Initiate Study of a New “B7””

Larry Ehl’s indispensable WSDOT Federal Funding blog has the news:

It’s part of a nationwide announcement: $776 million for 152 project for urban and rural transit providers in 45 states and the District of Columbia to help bring buses, bus facilities and related equipment into a state of good repair. Funding is provided from the FTA’s new State of Good Repair discretionary grant program.

$29m goes to Washington, mainly for new buses. The most interesting thing otherwise is probably $5.4m to refurbish escalators in the DSTT. Metro spokeswoman Linda Thielke tells me that last decade’s retrofit did not update all of the tunnel escalators, and this grant will allow them to complete the work, beginning next year. Those escalators date back to the tunnel opening in 1990.

When ST first announced that they would run one-car trains on some evenings and weekends to save money, it was said that this would be done based on expected demand due to special events.

Indeed, this kind of thing, if done right, can be very low-impact. But then there’s how this is actually being implemented. On a day with a Mariners game, Sounders game, and, uh, RapidRide opening, we got lots of anecdotal reports that trains were too full. Descriptions like “at capacity” and “full” are often thrown around way before trains are actually full, but people were left behind by one-car trains.

We’re at capacity NB at Beacon Hill. @soundtransit one-car trains are forcing people to wait for the next one. – Sherwin’s tweet

On a NB Link train, standing room only already at Tukwila. One car trains are not enough! – Sherwin’s tweet

Even with no major sports events… the car was at crush capacity. – PubliCola, accompanied by a photo nowhere near crush capacity

A lot of people had to stand on the 1-car trains, and some really didn’t have space for more to get on, even after the people who resist moving to the back moved to the back. (Well, more could have gotten on, but it would have been down to violating our American norms of personal space.)… I saw dozens wait for a next train. – Brent

It was bad. For one train, no one was able to board at Beacon Hill. The next train left half the people still standing, but we crushed in. Both were more crowded than the publicola photo. – psf

Not a good start.

By the end of the Sounders game, ST had started mixing in some 2-car trains, and indeed on Sunday it seemed that 2 cars were once again the norm.

ST did not return my questions over the weekend.

As a side note, in the past we’ve had really pointless comment wars over whether “capacity” should mean “how many people can fit in a car” or “the planning factor Sound Transit should use for how many people fit in a car.” The answer ultimately depends on what you’re trying to argue. Aside from that, the source for the former definition is this data sheet, which says 200. People use the word “full” to mean a lot of different things, but if a car was really leaving people behind I hope someone was out there counting, because that’s a practical limit that would be interesting to know.