Fans of Seattle Transit history should take a look a ebay (search for “metro transit”). There’s an interesting collection of old b&w photos from the Seattle Times archive. Just a few:
The Seattle Municipal Archives and the UW Digital Collections are also fun to poke around—though also kinda depressing since half the SMA photos are of streetcar tracks being ripped up. My personal favorite Seattle transit photo is this one from the funeral of J.D. “Father of City Light” Ross. ETB floral arrangement FTW!
Huh. Was he former 3rd ID? Or did 3rd ID have units stationed out here at that time?
Good eye, Matthew! You made me curious, so I went digging. Sure enough, 3rd ID was stationed at Fort Lewis in ’39.
The House Transportation Budget has the funding.
State Senator Barbara Bailey – you know, the one Republican STB endorsed for strategic reasons – is demanding Senate Transportation Committee members accept her amendments.
Frankly some people smoke, I work on the weekends so Monday or Friday I can be an OLFer. Put differently, tomorrow is going to be so stressful that I’m going to be at OLF Coupeville. I may or may not decide to stop by Island County Gov’t and request a look at a local funding option long-term, because if the future of these runs is dependent on special treatment… then our region that pays the state’s way is in trouble.
Okay enough about my part of the world. With all but one of you, you guys have been rather gracious and I daresay helpful. Thanks.
It is clear that arguing with me has helped you to refine your discourse, and to think long-term about additional funding options should direct state funding ever again come under threat.
I would say that I have been extremely helpful in that regard.
Your visciousness did not help matters. Ben Scheniderman (sp?) on the other hand did.
And yet your rhetoric has now been refined to address many of my concerns about the special treatment afforded the Connector and the past lack of interest in stable local funding solutions.
Meanwhile, I do hope that your funding remains in the budget, as most news sources have long suggested it was likely to. Ben likes to take credit for stuff, but I doubt he had the slightest thing to do with this.
Well from what I just read, Joe was trying to give some credit. So far only one person has tried to “take” credit. I wonder who…
I have been giving Joe a hard time not out of malice, but out of frustration at his early refusal to address the many political and logical inconsistencies in his approach to advocating for his favored service. Inconsistencies that he has been forced to address.
And while I may at times have come across as mean, I have actually been the only one to point out that Joe’s consternation has been largely unnecessary. News reports have long suggested that Connector funding was likely to be in the outgoing governor’s proposed budget, and that no one had any interest in actively removing it: http://www.goskagit.com/news/transit-funding-not-in-danger/article_0fd6859c-7166-11e2-bf60-0019bb2963f4.html It is nevertheless a good thing that Joe has started to think about pushing for a local funding stream should state aid ever been in true danger down the line.
I have no idea how Ben’s name was brought into this. I guarantee you that Ben has never so much as uttered a word about the Connector to anyone in Olympia.
Guys I have solution for you all.
I call it the Density Simulator.
While you pine away for spires of 200 story apodment condos, blanketing the landscape, you can live your fantasy of a high persons per square mile with this:
Just run it on the 60″ LCD and pretend that you are there! Sort of like a Yule Log for urbists…
It’s funny because no one actually lives there.
Or I could just, like, walk to Summit/Belmont.
I don’t need a density simulator. I live in the University District, about 300 feet from one of those beautiful new mid-rise, slate-gray UW student apartment buildings. There are a few more such buildings in the vicinity, and construction in my neighborhood is positively *booming*. Two vacant houses next to my building are about to be demolished to make way for a 107-unit apartment building. I welcome the change; an occupied building makes me feel safer than run-down, empty houses attracting litter and misbehavior. My bus connections to downtown, Capitol Hill, Ballard, and parts of Roosevelt/Ravenna would make other city residents envious. All my basic amenities are within walking distance, and many of them are open late into the evening. The only place I’d rather live is Capitol Hill, but then I’d be further from my workplace.
At the Highway 99 Construction Info site in Pioneer Square there is a cool map of all the various tunnels throughout Seattle – has anyone found a version on line? Google failed me.
I think the Times had something like that in conjunction with a story on the tunnel some time ago–it may have also linked to another article elsewhere that talked about it (I recall reading something but can’t remember where).
I have no interest in giving the Blethen family any additional money, so I’m not inclined to search the Times’ site, but you may find something there.
Hot tip: have your browser dump cookies for seattletimes.com on exit. And if you really loathe giving them money, use an ad-blocker while you’re on the site.
Except you have to subscribe now, which I won’t do.
(I’m familiar with the other options, primarily because the Times has the most noxious amounts of pop-ups I’ve run across.)
Last week, there was an excellent suggestion to roll Metro’s 197 route into ST’s 586 route, dispensing with the low-performing neighborhood tail of the 197. This was in response to the long-standing wish to see the 577 and 594 folded together off-peak for improved frequency and connectivity, 512 style.
I’d like to expand that restructure list to include the 592 and 595. The 595 is great for Gig Harbor and western Tacoma riders going to downtown Seattle for a 9-5 day. For getting anywhere in between, of course, it is much less useful. The same goes for DuPont and Lakewood riders on the 592, but at least they have Sounder as an option to all the places it stops.
A stop at Federal Way would have a noticeable time impact on the 592 and 595, but it might attract a new set of riders who are just trying to commute to locations in South King County, or to First Hill or UW.
A stop at Star Lake P&R would have minimal impact on travel time, and would include the opportunity to transfer to routes headed to the airport, First Hill, or UW. By itself, its connectivity to the rest of South King County is not as good as Federal Way’s.
A stop at Kent-Des Moines Station might have some similar utility, and provide near-direct access to Highline for the fleet of foot, but with a noticeable and erratic effect on travel time. So, this stop might not be a good one to add to the 592 and 595, but would serve a purpose for the 586, maximizing the number of riders who can catch it to UW.
.
The 586, 592, and 595 could all pitch in to help to take on riders from various routes on Metro’s axe list (152, 179, 190, 192, 197, possibly more), with the expectation that many of these riders will have to get used to standing if they aren’t already. Those who truly need to sit just need to ask the operator for assistance. I’m not sure what ST’s policy is on standing time, but as someone who stood like a sardine twice a day for a half hour on the 522 for several months, I’m not sympathetic to the cries that everyone needs a seat.
Given the low performance of the 586, 592, and 595, it is, indeed, their duty to take on more riders.
On the 71/72/73, when leaving downtown in the evening, it is routine to stand beweeen downtown and the U-district for the same amount of time it would take the 577 to get all the way to Federal Way.
It is also not terribly unusual to have to stand on the 545 between Microsoft and downtown Seattle for nearly and hour, as the bus inches forward in stop-and-go traffic.
the 590 and 592 should NOT stop at federal way. There already are buses traveling from federal way to Seattle (mt 177 and st 577) and from federal way to tacoma and lakewood (st 574). During peak hours all of these buses are packed as it is. Seems to be working fine. the st 595 portion across the narrows is the responsibility of pierce transit. its already an hour on the 592 and it does get packed.
On a separate note, I think it is absolutely ridiculous to expect a one seat ride to downtown Seattle from places as far out as Gig Harbor and DuPont – especially one that charges a fare that is only marginally higher than that of downtown Seattle from Capitol Hill.
I agree with asdf. I know Pierce Transit is paying for that segment; I hope it’s paying all its cost – and, frankly, I still think it’s pretty ridiculous given Pierce Transit’s budget crisis.
We need to treat peak and non-peak separately. Peak hours, fine, keep all those one-seat rides that are full. Off-peak, making the 577 and 594 interchangeable for Seattle – Federal Way would double the frequency to Federal Way at little cost. Frequency is the biggest factor in whether people choose to take transit. But in this case, it would be better to move the 578 to Kent, which would leave Federal Way with its current frequency and give Kent the all-day express it has long needed, again for little cost.
Currently, the 592 provides a redundant service: one-seat express peak-direction rides from Lakewood to Seattle. That the SIP does not contemplate changing its timing when Sounder goes to 20-minute headway is a head scratcher. Is the 592 even close to 1.0 load factor now?
But suppose we try to rescue the 592 via the other approach to reducing cost/rider. Create a super premium express fare: $5.50. How long would the 592 survive?
I don’t think it’s necessary for the one-seaters to downtown to stop during peak (although the very existence of the 590 and 592 both is suspect, as is the 595’s being more than a Gig Harbor-Tacoma express).
But it’s insane for the 594 not to stop off peak when the 577 isn’t running, because doing so could give us Kent-Seattle express service for no extra money by moving the 578. The only loss would be a connection between Federal Way and Auburn that is well served by the 181.
Having the 586 stop and canceling the 197 is also a good idea for the moment. It might even make the combined route enough of a performer, despite its length, to justify keeping it after U-Link opens.
Sound Transit’s policy is “For individual trips, load factors greater than 1.0 should not be exceeded for time periods greater than 15 minutes or for more than two consecutive stops, whichever is longer,” from .
Visiting Dresden, Germany, last week, I was impressed by the extent of the network of streetcars and trams. One surprising thing: when sharing lanes with auto traffic, the trams generally run down the center lanes of the road, and many stops have no real “station”: passengers just step out into the adjoining auto lanes! Within town, the drivers seem to just know and expect this, and (without exception, from my short experience) yield to the passengers embarking and disembarking. Further out of town where speeds are higher, there are special signals installed which stop auto traffic while passengers load and unload.
From what I saw, it is extremely efficient, but I found myself wondering about liability issues if such a system were ever used in the US. Still, it’s intriguing: could something like this be used in Seattle to get our street cars out of the right lane?
It’s probably illegal to pass stopping streetcars, as is the case with San Francisco’s cable cars and (if I remember right) Toronto’s streetcars.
When you say streetcars and trams, are you talking about two different kinds of vehicles or trackways? “Streetcar” is a calque of the German Strassenbahn due to the number of German immigrants in the US, while “tram” is the equivalent term in the UK (originally for mining railways). So you’re seeing the descendants of what originally inspired American cities to build streetcars.
As far as I can see “streetcars” and trams are the exact same vehicles but with different nomenclature. The cars used on the SLUT are the same as those used on tram routes in Amsterdam both built by Siemens.
The cars used on the SLUT are the same as those used on tram routes in Amsterdam both built by Siemens
Um no.
The SLUT uses trams designed and built by Inekon from the Czech Republic. They are a licensed version of those originally built by Skoda (who built Tacoma Link’s) and are similar to United Streetcar in Portland (who licensed the design from Inekon).
but yes … what we call “Streetcars” are the equivalent of “Trams”
These “curb hails” are definitely how things work in Toronto, on Philly’s remaining street-stopping lines, and on the 6 remaining blocks of incompletely-segregated street-running rail in Boston. See also: Michigan City “station” on the former interurban that is now Indiana’s South Shore Line commuter rail.
If you absolutely MUST share lanes, this historic method of center running is certainly more efficient than being stuck behind turning cars in the outer lanes. But the results are 100% inaccessible to the disabled and not even remotely up to modern safety standards. So good luck ever building them in the developed world ever again.
You can build center stations, though, with shared left-turn lanes after the stations. But yeah, on a modern alignment it’s hard to imagine passengers leaving to the outside from a center lane, even onto a crosswalk at a guaranteed red light.
ALL of our infrastructure and transit needs could be funded by actually taxing the top 1 percent….
Except the video had nothing to do with taxes. It was a video about our misperceptions of wealth distribution.
My point being that if we actually taxed the one percent to try and change the distrubution of wealth to what most people think it should be, we would have huge amounts of new revenue for things like infrastructure and transit….
Here’s a table from the Census Bureau showing the distribution of US household incomes as of 2010. In that year, there were almost 2.5 million households with incomes over $250,000, and their average income was $398,194. That means these households each had an average income of $148,194 over the $250,000 line. The total income over this line among all 2.5 million households is then $368 billion.
Let’s suppose, for the sake of argument, that all of this income is taxed at the low 15% capital gains rate, not the higher rates that apply to other forms of income. Let’s also suppose that none of this income is subject to state or local income taxes.
Under this scenario, the government currently takes in $55 billion on income over $250k (2.5 million * $148,194 * 15%). The real number is almost certainly higher, since not all of this income is actually capital gains and most people live in states that have an income tax.
Now, let’s suppose that we really want to stick it to the rich. We’ll tax all income over $250k at a 100% rate. That would bring in an additional $313 billion per year ($368 billion – $55 billion). This assumes nobody would change their behavior to avoid earning more than $250k (since spending even a minute to do so would be rather pointless if you have to give 100% of the excess to the government).
$313 billion sounds like a lot. It is a lot. However, the federal budget deficit this year is predicted to be $1,100 billion. You could confiscate all income over $250k and not even cover one-third of the budget deficit.
Taxing the rich is not the panacea a lot of people think and hope it is. While rich people have a lot of money, there just aren’t that many of them. That’s not to say their tax rates shouldn’t be higher. They should be higher. Even so, anyone who says raising tax rates for only the rich would be able to solve all our problems is either ignorant or lying.
Eric are you including non-discretionary spending in that figure?
When it comes to general fund money, how do the numbers compare?
I was including all federal spending and receipts in that figure.
Social Security costs $761 billion, Medicare costs $468 billion, and their associated payroll taxes bring in $924 billion.
So if you separate it out, the discretionary part of the budget has a deficit of about $800 billion and the Social Security/Medicare part is about $300 billion in the hole.
And of that $800 billion how much is military or VA?
Check out the poster. All budget categories are broken down there.
I’m just trying to put that $313 billion in the context of money that Congress actually gets to allocate on things like social programs or infastructure. Comparing it to the budget as a whole, most of which Congress has little to no control in allocating is not really helpful IMO.
Not to mention those other issues could also be easily solved by ‘taxing’ the rich more, remove the cap on payroll taxes and means test recipients.
The mandatory/discretionary spending split is mostly artificial. Congress can change the amount allocated to Social Security and Medicare at any time by changing the laws that determine who is entitled to what. There’s a bit more political pressure to leave entitlement programs alone, but that doesn’t mean that whole area of the budget is completely out of Congress’s control.
The revenue on the two sides is fungible as well. When the payroll tax was bringing in more than needed to meet present Social Security/Medicare obligations, the surplus was used to fund discretionary spending. When the payroll tax falls short of current Social Security/Medicare obligations, income tax revenue and general borrowing make up the difference.
Damn, the law of probabilities slid off the hill. Could have been much, much worse.
Idea for STB reoccurring segment. A day in the life of a transit user. Each month a different transit user would be profiled. All types of people using every type of mode would be covered, from the homeless, to the unemployed, to commuters, using DART, to local and express buses, to streetcars, LINK and Sounder. And then ask them various questions, like what do they use transit for. What do they like, what don’t they like, how could it be improved, etc.
This blog is heavy on LINK ridership posts and how (fill in name of asian or european city) does transit better, but we don’t often hear about the local mother who uses the bus to take home a “week’s worth of shopping.” That’s part of transit, too. We don’t often hear about them or what their transit concerns are.
Neat idea! Almost like a transit-oriented human-interest story angle :)
Great idea Sam!
Yes, great idea; I’d love to see it!
Sam,
For all your ideas my guest post inbox is rather empty.
Maybe Sam could start the show by writing about his experience.
Mike, I’m a commenter, not a blogger. It’s their job to come up with, and write about transit-related issues, not mine. I’m not going to do their work for them. If the bloggers here feel more comfortable interviewing the Joni Earls and Kevin Desmonds of the world rather than unemployed transit users, like I said, it’s their blog, and they can do what they want.
Sam, you have peculiar ideas about how a volunteer blog works.
I’m looking forward to Norman’s telework post.
How RapidRide Hurts Metro’s Image, example #247: My mom recently brought up the pending Metro cuts to me and wondered why Metro spent so much on RapidRide if they couldn’t maintain the service they had. (I did mention that Metro got a federal grant for RapidRide.)
Use the analogy of the local drug dealer giving free fixes to first time users. After that, you have to buy it. (FTA gives free buses for BRT new starts)
It’s a several-year issue. When they planned RapidRide in the early 2000s, they didn’t foresee the Great Recession, roller coaster gas prices, the federal government refusing to support the states during the recession, a legislature willing to cut Metro like CT, etc. You can’t just cancel it in the last years of rollout, because if you did that with every project you’d never get anything done and you’d throw away all that investment. Plus the fact that Metro needs to get in a better position longer term, with full-time frequency, off-board payment, and all the other things started with RapidRide. Again it would be foolish to through away our investment in these just because it’s rocky at rollout time. That’s also why the A, B, C, and D are being protected in the budget-cut scenario, because you have to keep your head above water and keep going forward a little bit or you’ll never get anywhere.
Hi,
Can anybody explain to me why, when I took a quick trip downtown on Wednesday, the Orca machine took an extra 25 cents out of my account? I caught the #70 to downtown at 12:04 p.m. (well inside the off-peak hours), then got off at 3rd and Pine and switched to a westbound #2 at 12:21. They took off 0.25 cents when I entered the #2. Here it is, as listed in my on-line Orca account. I have emailed the Orca people and asked to have the 0.25 removed.
Send them a message, just as you’ve done for us. This has happened to me once or twice in the 4 years of ORCA (once on KCMetro, once on WSF) and in both cases it was rapidly and courteously fixed.
I’ve had ‘peak’ fare charged several times well past peak time and most (some?) drivers know how to credit the meter. Some do not know how to do it.
The emailed reply from Metro/Orca:
Hello,
Thank you for contacting us about your ORCA card.
Your request has been forwarded to King County Metro for further assistance.
If you do not hear back within 7 days, you may contact Metro at (206) 553-3000.
Please refer to occurrence number: xxxxxxxx
Thank you!
ORCA Customer Service
1-888-988-6722
If you have a registered card, wait until the end of the week and check your file; otherwise get back in touch with Metro next Monday.
The new Talgo’s are arriving later this month! One of them will be on display during National Train Day in Portland, Oregon, along with the Seattle, Portland @ Spokane 700 steam locomotive.
And what’s going to be up at KSS? What are we, chopped-liver???? !!!! ;-)
At least KSS will re-open to the public on April 25, right Brian? You seem to have the inside scoop on these things.
Brian,
You have the “S’s” in “SP&S” backwards. It was “Spokane, Portland, and Seattle” (although it never went to Seattle, so go figure).
“Police say two men were stabbed without warning Sunday night as they were exiting a Metro bus in the city’s Beacon Hill neighborhood. One of the victims was stabbed in the back of the head and was taken to Harborview Medical Center with life-threatening injuries. The other man was stabbed in the shoulder and is expected to recover. Police spokesman Jeff Kappel said officers have arrested a suspect, but it was not clear what prompted the attack or if the man knew the victims, who are both in their 30s. The stabbing happened about 8:20 p.m. near the intersection of Beacon Avenue South and South Graham.
Kappel said the attacker got up from his seat and stabbed the two men as they were walking past him toward the bus door.”
From KOMO’s website just a few minutes ago.
This sounds like a route 36. In terms of dangerous routes (assaults, fights, etc.), is the 36 considered one of the more troublesome routes in Metro’s system?
The 36 is extremely busy (one of Metro’s top five routes), so it has its share of incidents. But, given its high volume of passengers, it’s not particularly dangerous per passenger.
Lines more likely to be troublesome include the 2, 3/4, 7, 8, 14, 48, 106, 107, 124, 131/132, 150, 358, and RR A.
Interesting you include the 2 in that list – I assume the 2S? I take that route at all different times of the day and night and have never had an issue. The 3/4, 7, 48 and 358 I can definitely anecdotally concur.
Yes, by “2” I entirely mean “2S.” And, really, there are only two stops on the line causing pretty much all the incidents: Seneca/Minor (where the methadone clinic is) and 23rd/Union.
Lynnwood Extension timeline. I got an email alert with a 2-page PDF saying:
Summer 2013: Draft EIS published.
Fall 2013: Preferred alternative chosen by Board.
Late 2014: Final EIS published, and Board selects projects to be built.
Thanks. I guess it’s time to start emailing board members about making sure a 125th/130th Station is in the plan.
It also says Shoreline is working on its station-area zoning. How it can do that without knowing where the stations will be is another question. But it’s clear from noises ST has made earlier that 185th will undoubtedly be a station, 175th was ruled out at an earlier stage, and either 145th or 155th may be a station. It partly depends on the decision on 130th because the possibilities are 145th; 130th and 155th; or 130th and 145th. But the latter is least likely because it would cause uneven stop spacing (28 blocks south of 130th, 15 blocks south of 145th, 40 blocks south of 185th).
Also re the Ballard study: the results of the public meeting are expected this summer. This will probably just be an analysis of the feedback, not actual alternatives or decisions yet.
Either 130th or 155th is a considerably better site than 145th. But 130th has the only meaningful concentration of multifamily housing in the whole bunch, so I’d think it would warrant first priority.
185th is really a stepchild compromise that is about ensuring that a frequent crosstown bus corridor can connect North City, Link, Aurora, and Richmond Beach. There is essentially nothing in the actual area of the station.
Fans of Seattle Transit history should take a look a ebay (search for “metro transit”). There’s an interesting collection of old b&w photos from the Seattle Times archive. Just a few:
35 year old trolley,
4th & Pike,
Hoping the brakes are working
The Seattle Municipal Archives and the UW Digital Collections are also fun to poke around—though also kinda depressing since half the SMA photos are of streetcar tracks being ripped up. My personal favorite Seattle transit photo is this one from the funeral of J.D. “Father of City Light” Ross. ETB floral arrangement FTW!
Huh. Was he former 3rd ID? Or did 3rd ID have units stationed out here at that time?
Good eye, Matthew! You made me curious, so I went digging. Sure enough, 3rd ID was stationed at Fort Lewis in ’39.
http://www.ranger95.com/3rd_id_history/chapter1_prep_for_war.html
Quick Tri-County Connector update:
The House Transportation Budget has the funding.
State Senator Barbara Bailey – you know, the one Republican STB endorsed for strategic reasons – is demanding Senate Transportation Committee members accept her amendments.
Frankly some people smoke, I work on the weekends so Monday or Friday I can be an OLFer. Put differently, tomorrow is going to be so stressful that I’m going to be at OLF Coupeville. I may or may not decide to stop by Island County Gov’t and request a look at a local funding option long-term, because if the future of these runs is dependent on special treatment… then our region that pays the state’s way is in trouble.
Okay enough about my part of the world. With all but one of you, you guys have been rather gracious and I daresay helpful. Thanks.
It is clear that arguing with me has helped you to refine your discourse, and to think long-term about additional funding options should direct state funding ever again come under threat.
I would say that I have been extremely helpful in that regard.
Your visciousness did not help matters. Ben Scheniderman (sp?) on the other hand did.
And yet your rhetoric has now been refined to address many of my concerns about the special treatment afforded the Connector and the past lack of interest in stable local funding solutions.
Meanwhile, I do hope that your funding remains in the budget, as most news sources have long suggested it was likely to. Ben likes to take credit for stuff, but I doubt he had the slightest thing to do with this.
Well from what I just read, Joe was trying to give some credit. So far only one person has tried to “take” credit. I wonder who…
I have been giving Joe a hard time not out of malice, but out of frustration at his early refusal to address the many political and logical inconsistencies in his approach to advocating for his favored service. Inconsistencies that he has been forced to address.
And while I may at times have come across as mean, I have actually been the only one to point out that Joe’s consternation has been largely unnecessary. News reports have long suggested that Connector funding was likely to be in the outgoing governor’s proposed budget, and that no one had any interest in actively removing it: http://www.goskagit.com/news/transit-funding-not-in-danger/article_0fd6859c-7166-11e2-bf60-0019bb2963f4.html It is nevertheless a good thing that Joe has started to think about pushing for a local funding stream should state aid ever been in true danger down the line.
I have no idea how Ben’s name was brought into this. I guarantee you that Ben has never so much as uttered a word about the Connector to anyone in Olympia.
Guys I have solution for you all.
I call it the Density Simulator.
While you pine away for spires of 200 story apodment condos, blanketing the landscape, you can live your fantasy of a high persons per square mile with this:
http://www.earthcam.com/usa/newyork/timessquare/
Just run it on the 60″ LCD and pretend that you are there! Sort of like a Yule Log for urbists…
It’s funny because no one actually lives there.
Or I could just, like, walk to Summit/Belmont.
I don’t need a density simulator. I live in the University District, about 300 feet from one of those beautiful new mid-rise, slate-gray UW student apartment buildings. There are a few more such buildings in the vicinity, and construction in my neighborhood is positively *booming*. Two vacant houses next to my building are about to be demolished to make way for a 107-unit apartment building. I welcome the change; an occupied building makes me feel safer than run-down, empty houses attracting litter and misbehavior. My bus connections to downtown, Capitol Hill, Ballard, and parts of Roosevelt/Ravenna would make other city residents envious. All my basic amenities are within walking distance, and many of them are open late into the evening. The only place I’d rather live is Capitol Hill, but then I’d be further from my workplace.
At the Highway 99 Construction Info site in Pioneer Square there is a cool map of all the various tunnels throughout Seattle – has anyone found a version on line? Google failed me.
I think the Times had something like that in conjunction with a story on the tunnel some time ago–it may have also linked to another article elsewhere that talked about it (I recall reading something but can’t remember where).
I have no interest in giving the Blethen family any additional money, so I’m not inclined to search the Times’ site, but you may find something there.
Hot tip: have your browser dump cookies for seattletimes.com on exit. And if you really loathe giving them money, use an ad-blocker while you’re on the site.
Except you have to subscribe now, which I won’t do.
(I’m familiar with the other options, primarily because the Times has the most noxious amounts of pop-ups I’ve run across.)
Last week, there was an excellent suggestion to roll Metro’s 197 route into ST’s 586 route, dispensing with the low-performing neighborhood tail of the 197. This was in response to the long-standing wish to see the 577 and 594 folded together off-peak for improved frequency and connectivity, 512 style.
I’d like to expand that restructure list to include the 592 and 595. The 595 is great for Gig Harbor and western Tacoma riders going to downtown Seattle for a 9-5 day. For getting anywhere in between, of course, it is much less useful. The same goes for DuPont and Lakewood riders on the 592, but at least they have Sounder as an option to all the places it stops.
A stop at Federal Way would have a noticeable time impact on the 592 and 595, but it might attract a new set of riders who are just trying to commute to locations in South King County, or to First Hill or UW.
A stop at Star Lake P&R would have minimal impact on travel time, and would include the opportunity to transfer to routes headed to the airport, First Hill, or UW. By itself, its connectivity to the rest of South King County is not as good as Federal Way’s.
A stop at Kent-Des Moines Station might have some similar utility, and provide near-direct access to Highline for the fleet of foot, but with a noticeable and erratic effect on travel time. So, this stop might not be a good one to add to the 592 and 595, but would serve a purpose for the 586, maximizing the number of riders who can catch it to UW.
.
The 586, 592, and 595 could all pitch in to help to take on riders from various routes on Metro’s axe list (152, 179, 190, 192, 197, possibly more), with the expectation that many of these riders will have to get used to standing if they aren’t already. Those who truly need to sit just need to ask the operator for assistance. I’m not sure what ST’s policy is on standing time, but as someone who stood like a sardine twice a day for a half hour on the 522 for several months, I’m not sympathetic to the cries that everyone needs a seat.
Given the low performance of the 586, 592, and 595, it is, indeed, their duty to take on more riders.
On the 71/72/73, when leaving downtown in the evening, it is routine to stand beweeen downtown and the U-district for the same amount of time it would take the 577 to get all the way to Federal Way.
It is also not terribly unusual to have to stand on the 545 between Microsoft and downtown Seattle for nearly and hour, as the bus inches forward in stop-and-go traffic.
the 590 and 592 should NOT stop at federal way. There already are buses traveling from federal way to Seattle (mt 177 and st 577) and from federal way to tacoma and lakewood (st 574). During peak hours all of these buses are packed as it is. Seems to be working fine. the st 595 portion across the narrows is the responsibility of pierce transit. its already an hour on the 592 and it does get packed.
On a separate note, I think it is absolutely ridiculous to expect a one seat ride to downtown Seattle from places as far out as Gig Harbor and DuPont – especially one that charges a fare that is only marginally higher than that of downtown Seattle from Capitol Hill.
I agree with asdf. I know Pierce Transit is paying for that segment; I hope it’s paying all its cost – and, frankly, I still think it’s pretty ridiculous given Pierce Transit’s budget crisis.
We need to treat peak and non-peak separately. Peak hours, fine, keep all those one-seat rides that are full. Off-peak, making the 577 and 594 interchangeable for Seattle – Federal Way would double the frequency to Federal Way at little cost. Frequency is the biggest factor in whether people choose to take transit. But in this case, it would be better to move the 578 to Kent, which would leave Federal Way with its current frequency and give Kent the all-day express it has long needed, again for little cost.
Currently, the 592 provides a redundant service: one-seat express peak-direction rides from Lakewood to Seattle. That the SIP does not contemplate changing its timing when Sounder goes to 20-minute headway is a head scratcher. Is the 592 even close to 1.0 load factor now?
But suppose we try to rescue the 592 via the other approach to reducing cost/rider. Create a super premium express fare: $5.50. How long would the 592 survive?
I don’t think it’s necessary for the one-seaters to downtown to stop during peak (although the very existence of the 590 and 592 both is suspect, as is the 595’s being more than a Gig Harbor-Tacoma express).
But it’s insane for the 594 not to stop off peak when the 577 isn’t running, because doing so could give us Kent-Seattle express service for no extra money by moving the 578. The only loss would be a connection between Federal Way and Auburn that is well served by the 181.
Having the 586 stop and canceling the 197 is also a good idea for the moment. It might even make the combined route enough of a performer, despite its length, to justify keeping it after U-Link opens.
Sound Transit’s policy is “For individual trips, load factors greater than 1.0 should not be exceeded for time periods greater than 15 minutes or for more than two consecutive stops, whichever is longer,” from .
Visiting Dresden, Germany, last week, I was impressed by the extent of the network of streetcars and trams. One surprising thing: when sharing lanes with auto traffic, the trams generally run down the center lanes of the road, and many stops have no real “station”: passengers just step out into the adjoining auto lanes! Within town, the drivers seem to just know and expect this, and (without exception, from my short experience) yield to the passengers embarking and disembarking. Further out of town where speeds are higher, there are special signals installed which stop auto traffic while passengers load and unload.
From what I saw, it is extremely efficient, but I found myself wondering about liability issues if such a system were ever used in the US. Still, it’s intriguing: could something like this be used in Seattle to get our street cars out of the right lane?
It’s probably illegal to pass stopping streetcars, as is the case with San Francisco’s cable cars and (if I remember right) Toronto’s streetcars.
When you say streetcars and trams, are you talking about two different kinds of vehicles or trackways? “Streetcar” is a calque of the German Strassenbahn due to the number of German immigrants in the US, while “tram” is the equivalent term in the UK (originally for mining railways). So you’re seeing the descendants of what originally inspired American cities to build streetcars.
As far as I can see “streetcars” and trams are the exact same vehicles but with different nomenclature. The cars used on the SLUT are the same as those used on tram routes in Amsterdam both built by Siemens.
Um no.
The SLUT uses trams designed and built by Inekon from the Czech Republic. They are a licensed version of those originally built by Skoda (who built Tacoma Link’s) and are similar to United Streetcar in Portland (who licensed the design from Inekon).
but yes … what we call “Streetcars” are the equivalent of “Trams”
These “curb hails” are definitely how things work in Toronto, on Philly’s remaining street-stopping lines, and on the 6 remaining blocks of incompletely-segregated street-running rail in Boston. See also: Michigan City “station” on the former interurban that is now Indiana’s South Shore Line commuter rail.
If you absolutely MUST share lanes, this historic method of center running is certainly more efficient than being stuck behind turning cars in the outer lanes. But the results are 100% inaccessible to the disabled and not even remotely up to modern safety standards. So good luck ever building them in the developed world ever again.
You can build center stations, though, with shared left-turn lanes after the stations. But yeah, on a modern alignment it’s hard to imagine passengers leaving to the outside from a center lane, even onto a crosswalk at a guaranteed red light.
Geat video on wealth in this country…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QPKKQnijnsM
ALL of our infrastructure and transit needs could be funded by actually taxing the top 1 percent….
Except the video had nothing to do with taxes. It was a video about our misperceptions of wealth distribution.
My point being that if we actually taxed the one percent to try and change the distrubution of wealth to what most people think it should be, we would have huge amounts of new revenue for things like infrastructure and transit….
Here’s a table from the Census Bureau showing the distribution of US household incomes as of 2010. In that year, there were almost 2.5 million households with incomes over $250,000, and their average income was $398,194. That means these households each had an average income of $148,194 over the $250,000 line. The total income over this line among all 2.5 million households is then $368 billion.
Let’s suppose, for the sake of argument, that all of this income is taxed at the low 15% capital gains rate, not the higher rates that apply to other forms of income. Let’s also suppose that none of this income is subject to state or local income taxes.
Under this scenario, the government currently takes in $55 billion on income over $250k (2.5 million * $148,194 * 15%). The real number is almost certainly higher, since not all of this income is actually capital gains and most people live in states that have an income tax.
Now, let’s suppose that we really want to stick it to the rich. We’ll tax all income over $250k at a 100% rate. That would bring in an additional $313 billion per year ($368 billion – $55 billion). This assumes nobody would change their behavior to avoid earning more than $250k (since spending even a minute to do so would be rather pointless if you have to give 100% of the excess to the government).
$313 billion sounds like a lot. It is a lot. However, the federal budget deficit this year is predicted to be $1,100 billion. You could confiscate all income over $250k and not even cover one-third of the budget deficit.
Taxing the rich is not the panacea a lot of people think and hope it is. While rich people have a lot of money, there just aren’t that many of them. That’s not to say their tax rates shouldn’t be higher. They should be higher. Even so, anyone who says raising tax rates for only the rich would be able to solve all our problems is either ignorant or lying.
Eric are you including non-discretionary spending in that figure?
When it comes to general fund money, how do the numbers compare?
I was including all federal spending and receipts in that figure.
Social Security costs $761 billion, Medicare costs $468 billion, and their associated payroll taxes bring in $924 billion.
So if you separate it out, the discretionary part of the budget has a deficit of about $800 billion and the Social Security/Medicare part is about $300 billion in the hole.
And of that $800 billion how much is military or VA?
Check out the poster. All budget categories are broken down there.
I’m just trying to put that $313 billion in the context of money that Congress actually gets to allocate on things like social programs or infastructure. Comparing it to the budget as a whole, most of which Congress has little to no control in allocating is not really helpful IMO.
Not to mention those other issues could also be easily solved by ‘taxing’ the rich more, remove the cap on payroll taxes and means test recipients.
The mandatory/discretionary spending split is mostly artificial. Congress can change the amount allocated to Social Security and Medicare at any time by changing the laws that determine who is entitled to what. There’s a bit more political pressure to leave entitlement programs alone, but that doesn’t mean that whole area of the budget is completely out of Congress’s control.
The revenue on the two sides is fungible as well. When the payroll tax was bringing in more than needed to meet present Social Security/Medicare obligations, the surplus was used to fund discretionary spending. When the payroll tax falls short of current Social Security/Medicare obligations, income tax revenue and general borrowing make up the difference.
Breaking News That Was Bound to Happen:
KING 5: Amtrak train hit by landslide near Everett
Damn, the law of probabilities slid off the hill. Could have been much, much worse.
Idea for STB reoccurring segment. A day in the life of a transit user. Each month a different transit user would be profiled. All types of people using every type of mode would be covered, from the homeless, to the unemployed, to commuters, using DART, to local and express buses, to streetcars, LINK and Sounder. And then ask them various questions, like what do they use transit for. What do they like, what don’t they like, how could it be improved, etc.
This blog is heavy on LINK ridership posts and how (fill in name of asian or european city) does transit better, but we don’t often hear about the local mother who uses the bus to take home a “week’s worth of shopping.” That’s part of transit, too. We don’t often hear about them or what their transit concerns are.
Neat idea! Almost like a transit-oriented human-interest story angle :)
Great idea Sam!
Yes, great idea; I’d love to see it!
Sam,
For all your ideas my guest post inbox is rather empty.
Maybe Sam could start the show by writing about his experience.
Mike, I’m a commenter, not a blogger. It’s their job to come up with, and write about transit-related issues, not mine. I’m not going to do their work for them. If the bloggers here feel more comfortable interviewing the Joni Earls and Kevin Desmonds of the world rather than unemployed transit users, like I said, it’s their blog, and they can do what they want.
Sam, you have peculiar ideas about how a volunteer blog works.
I’m looking forward to Norman’s telework post.
How RapidRide Hurts Metro’s Image, example #247: My mom recently brought up the pending Metro cuts to me and wondered why Metro spent so much on RapidRide if they couldn’t maintain the service they had. (I did mention that Metro got a federal grant for RapidRide.)
Use the analogy of the local drug dealer giving free fixes to first time users. After that, you have to buy it. (FTA gives free buses for BRT new starts)
It’s a several-year issue. When they planned RapidRide in the early 2000s, they didn’t foresee the Great Recession, roller coaster gas prices, the federal government refusing to support the states during the recession, a legislature willing to cut Metro like CT, etc. You can’t just cancel it in the last years of rollout, because if you did that with every project you’d never get anything done and you’d throw away all that investment. Plus the fact that Metro needs to get in a better position longer term, with full-time frequency, off-board payment, and all the other things started with RapidRide. Again it would be foolish to through away our investment in these just because it’s rocky at rollout time. That’s also why the A, B, C, and D are being protected in the budget-cut scenario, because you have to keep your head above water and keep going forward a little bit or you’ll never get anywhere.
Hi,
Can anybody explain to me why, when I took a quick trip downtown on Wednesday, the Orca machine took an extra 25 cents out of my account? I caught the #70 to downtown at 12:04 p.m. (well inside the off-peak hours), then got off at 3rd and Pine and switched to a westbound #2 at 12:21. They took off 0.25 cents when I entered the #2. Here it is, as listed in my on-line Orca account. I have emailed the Orca people and asked to have the 0.25 removed.
04/03/2013 12:21 PM Purse Use Journey, Route 2 KCM, KCM-BUS-4162 Purse (#28)
-0.25 14.25
04/03/2013 12:04 PM Purse Use Journey, Route 70 KCM, KCM-BUS-7073 Purse (#27)
-2.25 14.50
Send them a message, just as you’ve done for us. This has happened to me once or twice in the 4 years of ORCA (once on KCMetro, once on WSF) and in both cases it was rapidly and courteously fixed.
I’ve had ‘peak’ fare charged several times well past peak time and most (some?) drivers know how to credit the meter. Some do not know how to do it.
The emailed reply from Metro/Orca:
Hello,
Thank you for contacting us about your ORCA card.
Your request has been forwarded to King County Metro for further assistance.
If you do not hear back within 7 days, you may contact Metro at (206) 553-3000.
Please refer to occurrence number: xxxxxxxx
Thank you!
ORCA Customer Service
1-888-988-6722
If you have a registered card, wait until the end of the week and check your file; otherwise get back in touch with Metro next Monday.
The new Talgo’s are arriving later this month! One of them will be on display during National Train Day in Portland, Oregon, along with the Seattle, Portland @ Spokane 700 steam locomotive.
And what’s going to be up at KSS? What are we, chopped-liver???? !!!! ;-)
At least KSS will re-open to the public on April 25, right Brian? You seem to have the inside scoop on these things.
Brian,
You have the “S’s” in “SP&S” backwards. It was “Spokane, Portland, and Seattle” (although it never went to Seattle, so go figure).
“Police say two men were stabbed without warning Sunday night as they were exiting a Metro bus in the city’s Beacon Hill neighborhood. One of the victims was stabbed in the back of the head and was taken to Harborview Medical Center with life-threatening injuries. The other man was stabbed in the shoulder and is expected to recover. Police spokesman Jeff Kappel said officers have arrested a suspect, but it was not clear what prompted the attack or if the man knew the victims, who are both in their 30s. The stabbing happened about 8:20 p.m. near the intersection of Beacon Avenue South and South Graham.
Kappel said the attacker got up from his seat and stabbed the two men as they were walking past him toward the bus door.”
From KOMO’s website just a few minutes ago.
This sounds like a route 36. In terms of dangerous routes (assaults, fights, etc.), is the 36 considered one of the more troublesome routes in Metro’s system?
The 36 is extremely busy (one of Metro’s top five routes), so it has its share of incidents. But, given its high volume of passengers, it’s not particularly dangerous per passenger.
Lines more likely to be troublesome include the 2, 3/4, 7, 8, 14, 48, 106, 107, 124, 131/132, 150, 358, and RR A.
Interesting you include the 2 in that list – I assume the 2S? I take that route at all different times of the day and night and have never had an issue. The 3/4, 7, 48 and 358 I can definitely anecdotally concur.
Yes, by “2” I entirely mean “2S.” And, really, there are only two stops on the line causing pretty much all the incidents: Seneca/Minor (where the methadone clinic is) and 23rd/Union.
Lynnwood Extension timeline. I got an email alert with a 2-page PDF saying:
Summer 2013: Draft EIS published.
Fall 2013: Preferred alternative chosen by Board.
Late 2014: Final EIS published, and Board selects projects to be built.
Thanks. I guess it’s time to start emailing board members about making sure a 125th/130th Station is in the plan.
It also says Shoreline is working on its station-area zoning. How it can do that without knowing where the stations will be is another question. But it’s clear from noises ST has made earlier that 185th will undoubtedly be a station, 175th was ruled out at an earlier stage, and either 145th or 155th may be a station. It partly depends on the decision on 130th because the possibilities are 145th; 130th and 155th; or 130th and 145th. But the latter is least likely because it would cause uneven stop spacing (28 blocks south of 130th, 15 blocks south of 145th, 40 blocks south of 185th).
Also re the Ballard study: the results of the public meeting are expected this summer. This will probably just be an analysis of the feedback, not actual alternatives or decisions yet.
Either 130th or 155th is a considerably better site than 145th. But 130th has the only meaningful concentration of multifamily housing in the whole bunch, so I’d think it would warrant first priority.
185th is really a stepchild compromise that is about ensuring that a frequent crosstown bus corridor can connect North City, Link, Aurora, and Richmond Beach. There is essentially nothing in the actual area of the station.