Atomic Taco/Flickr

[UPDATE: Cellphone waiting lot photo now actually shows the new lot.]

On Wednesday Sound Transit invited media to see the 365 foot long gantry being used to construct the guideway between SeaTac/Airport Station and the future Angle Lake Station. The 400 ton gantry hoists pre-cast concrete segments, each weighing 35-45 tons, in to place. The spans between columns are typically 150 feet long and a crew of 12 can be construct a span in 2-3 days. Approximately 80% of the columns in the 1.6 mile extension have been constructed to date.

The spans shown in the photos here are the two southernmost ones. Angle Lake Station will be a center platform station, so two separate spans come out of the station and merge in to one, which will eventually continue to Kent/Des Moines Road.

In August, construction will begin on the 1,050 stall garage, sited just north of the station.

In a somewhat related story, SeaTac’s Cell Phone Lot moved last week to a location on S 170th between the Airport Expressway. The lot has 200 spaces, up from 130 and trades mediocre tarmac views for a panorama of the Airport Link extension alignment.

More photos below the jump.

The new cellphone waiting lot

52 Replies to “Angle Lake Construction Photos”

  1. I have a sinking feeling that 1,050-stall parking garage is going to effectively turn into a free extension of airport parking. Even if Sound Transit aggressively enforced “No parking 2-5 AM” signs to deter long-term parkers, there are airport employees looking to avoid parking expenses. The thought of someone driving in from Bellevue or Seattle to Angle Lake Station to park for free and take an ultra-frequent, 2-minute train shuttle to the terminal makes me cringe.

      1. If so, I think it would show up as south bound trips from there (fairly easy to measure). Anyone have the stats on that?

        The tricky part is separating the number of park and ride users versus walk up users. My guess is that very few people walk to that station. The freeway and Pacific Highway south do a very good job of making a walk to that station miserable for all but a handful of people directly east of the station.

        It is possible that someone transfers to a bus from Sea-Tac, but that seems unlikely. I think most buses that serve Sea-Tac also serve TIB. Plus, if very few people walk up, then it is unlikely that people would drive to the park and ride, take the train to Sea-Tac, then take a bus somewhere else.

      2. You can get info on riders who are traveling the Sea-Tac – TIB segment from the SIP. Weekdays, of the 4,385 average riders that get on at Sea-Tac, 360 get off at TIB. Southbound, 375 of 3,975 riders get on at TIB.

      3. aw, It is probably worse than that. Some riders parking at TIBS take the A Line. That said, we don’t know for sure whether riders taking that short trip are actually parking at TIBS. Some may be transferring. Others may be headed down to the airport for the joy ride (riding the whole length of Link) or because it has public restrooms.

      4. I was wrong about the “most buses that serve Sea-Tac also serve TIB”. It looks like the A line, is the only one. So, it looks like around 10% + A Line riders – people who take a bus or walk to TIM. Overall not a very big number (in my estimation).

      5. I regularly see Menzies aviation employees in uniform getting on and off Link at TIBS. Not only that, I expect they may not be paying fares, since I’ve never seen any fare inspectors at work between Airport Station and TIBS.

      1. It is not clear whether employees have to pay for that parking. My guess is that after the $15 minimum wage finally goes into effect, affected companies will provide a parking spot, at the employee’s expense, unless it has been specified in a labor contract.

        I keep getting told that the 574 runs overnight, all the way from Lakewood, to provide airport employees a place to park for free (i.e. Kent-Des Moines P&R and Star Lake P&R). Something about that doesn’t make sense.

        I personally don’t think everyone who works at the airport should get free parking. I think they should get a *choice* of a subsidized parking spot, a subsidized vanpool pass, or a free monthly transit pass, and a reasonable expectation of adequate 24/7 transit to go with that pass. Employees who ride transit to work should not get stuck subsididing employees who drive to work.

        I also think as few parking stalls as possible at Angle Lake Station should be free.

      2. According to that link, some of the employees might have to pay for parking. Depending on the cost, some of them might save money by driving, then taking the train. There are also people who commute by plane, or are otherwise flying only for the day. This might save them some money.

        I agree that people from the heart of Seattle or Bellevue aren’t likely to fight traffic, only to save a couple bucks on parking. However, if you are coming from West Seattle/White Center/Burien, then it might make sense. On the other hand, I’m really not sure how good the existing buses are for this. For example, it might make more sense to drive to the Burien Park and Ride and take a bus from there. East of Sea-Tac, you have big traffic concerns (on I-405).

        My guess is the folks who live north of Sea-Tac and use the Park and Ride as free airport parking will be those that have an early flight or work early hours. Those who commute by plane usually take early flights (and work four days a week). Traffic isn’t much of an issue at that hour, and the buses aren’t great either. For people coming from the south, I wouldn’t be surprised if a high percentage of them get off at Sea-Tac instead of continuing north. It will be interesting to see the numbers once the station is built.

        Time will tell if this is much of an issue. It really doesn’t bother me, because these are folks that are likely to drive anyway (I don’t blame them if the alternative is horrible). But if there are lots of people doing this, then it could clog the park and ride, which could be a problem.

      3. Dunno…seems like the only reason people hate parking at remote LINK stations is that it allows people to have both cheap property and to access the amenities (that they are rightly entitled to as taxpayers) like the stadiums.

        I don’t for a minute buy any of the claptrap about urban density, or the need to remove parking. The only reason for that is to line the pockets of real estate developers who want a captive audience…no car, no access but transit, no land but theirs.

      4. Sound Transit’s model, with some geometric/realpolitik merit, insists on providing large quantities of mostly-free parking for commuters who use its services.

        Once this model has been pursued,
        the agency has no right to expect or to demand that users “commute” more than one stop. If that’s how airport employees want to use the train, and if they pay the $2.00 each way to ride, that is their right.

      5. Burienites trying to get home after a night at the ballpark would probably prefer taking Link+140(F) over taking the 132 (which might take over an hour to show up, if it does show up), or backtracking to the 120…. if only the 140 ran that late. :(

      6. …And nothing in that link would prevent — or even discourage — employees from legitimately parking and ORCA-ing to the terminal.

        Anyway, there’s virtually no chance that airport employees, whose shifts have little relationship to normal commute patterns, would have trouble beating a thousand cars into the non-permit stalls.

    1. Another reason why Sound Transit should implement fee’s for parking at their P&R lots. Personally I would have done this yesterday, ORCA integration or not. Even though I use the P&R facility’s often, I think a nominal fee ($2-4) to help offset the cost of M&O is not an unreasonable thing to ask for.

    2. A preview of this behavior can be seen today in South Bellevue where people ride the 550 from Bellevue to the South Bellevue Park & Ride to their car. Anecdotally, you see a sizable number of people exiting the 550 in the afternoons heading to their car. It is difficult to imagine people making this commute for any reason other than to avoid paying for parking as driving that extra mile or two would be a matter of minutes. That said, every last one of those individuals may be transferring from other transit service which would make those trips more “valuable” in terms of relieving congestion.

      Font=”Broken Record”: The simplest way to deal with this is to add modest parking fees wherever Park & Rides are oversubscribed. /Font – A recent visit to Issaquah Park & Ride yielded spaces available even at 10:30am on a weekday. Since I arrived after 10am, the spots reserved for paid parking until 10am had opened up and were available to those of us arriving late. (The only thing missing at Issaquah P&R would be a way to purchase parking by the day if I arrive earlier to find no “free” parking available. A Seattle-like parking system involving meters with a sticker or Pay By Phone would be straight forward to add.)

      1. Double standard. What are we told when the idea of licensing bicycles comes up? We don’t want to tax them because we don’t want to discourage them from biking. Same thing with P&R’s. We don’t want people driving from home to work. We want them on public transit, even if just part of the way. And, like we are told with bicyclists, adding any fees or taxes discourages behavior. Parking fees will discourage some from taking transit. And we must do whatever we can to promote public transit use and biking. Any type of fee that discourages positive commuting behavior is bad, right?

      2. Sam has out-lefted us by advocating for not having fares. Sam, what is your back-up plan for paying for bus service?

      3. When the P&Rs were first built it was all about encouraging people to take transit, so there was no fee because it would be counterproductive, and their taxes had paid for the P&R anyway. But a lot of other things were different then. Bus fare was 60c (2 zones), and you could buy a house with one salary. As P&Rs become more popular, at some point the paradigm has to shift from enticing people to use them to charging them for the cost of providing them. Especially since the transit agencies are so tight on funds now.

        At some point we may have to charge bicycles for their impact on the infrastructure, but that would be in the far future when we have Netherlands levels of bike use and they’re actually impacting a significant amount. Right now they’re just a drop in the ocean, and we’re still at the stage of enticing people to bike.

    1. Yes, because there is even less at Angle Lake Station than in “downtown” Kent. But they do have a jail, just like Kent Station. (I’m kidding, John.)

      You know what would be even faster than getting to downtown Seattle via a Kent commuters’ shuttle and Link? A Kent commuter’s shuttle to Kent-Des Moines P&R, and having a stop added on the 594 at Kent Des Moines P&R (off-peak only and counter-peak only). The shuttle could then continue to Highline CC. Then, you don’t have to wait three years.

      Still, that’s a three-seat ride from East Hill. Do we want to get serious about Aleks’ proposal to through-route route 169 up to Rainier Beach Station? That should be the fastest for East Hill.

      I’d actually suggest a tweak on Aleks’ proposal to interline the current 180 south, 164, and 168 to become the Kent commuters’ shuttle to Kent-Des Moines P&R, providing 6 trips an hour between Kent Station and the P&R. Even if the 594 doesn’t have the hours available to run every 10 minutes, it wouldn’t be a terrible wait at the P&R, and only slightly more open to the elements than Angle Lake Station, but with less of a slog to get to the transfer point.

      1. I’ll take a LINK in the hand over 2 buses in the bush any day.

        This station is being built.

        I know I can drive to it quickly.

        I know LINK runs all day isn’t going to change its route.

        I know that at least at night I’d probably get parking.

        And because it’s remote, it’s less likely to have criminal gangs hanging around like some of the other stations.

        This is really all I wanted…short them building a spur line between Angle and Kent Station.

      2. This is a classic example of how people are willing to take a travel time penalty for the sake of shorter and more comfortable waits.

    2. You’ve set your bar pretty low for favorite places John. Assuming that Prop1 passes (big IF), and Metro revises one of their non-existing routes to Angle Lk from Kent (166 or 180), or adds a new shuttle route between the two (bigger IF), then the time penalty for that trip to anywhere else north of TIBS is a huge waste of your time. 20-25 minutes between KTC-200th, and a 5-10 minute wait for a Link train puts you down 1/2 hour, and you’re no closer to Seattle when you finally do get on Link.
      I don’t see the 166 not serving HLCC, nor do I see the 180 not serving Kent Boeing and going out of direction to 200th.
      That’s probably why there is no mention of bus transfers from the latest public meeting ST did on Angle Lake, nor can you even find a bus in any of the pretty artists drawings.
      But, the 1,000 car garage looks really spiffy. You’ll probably want to drive there!

      1. “But, the 1,000 car garage looks really spiffy. You’ll probably want to drive there!”

        … and enjoy paying $30 or more a month to guarantee a parking spot. But at least you will have saved $40-60 on your annual car tab. I’m afraid service to Angle Lake Station doesn’t grow on trees.

      2. “more like $11/mo for a guaranteed parking spot.”

        They’re not guaranteed: “Permit parking is available on a first-come, first-served basis to permit holders.” My first experience with Issaquah TC (not P&R as I wrote above) was positive. Adding a pay by the day option would be a nice addition for those who don’t regularly ride transit but would like to access that paid (preferred/relatively guaranteed) parking.

        If I’m in the area doing errands, I’ll keep checking up on this program as I’m hopeful ST is striking the correct balance.

  2. So how earthquake resistant is this thing?
    I don’t see much rebar, or anything else that would tell me.
    (Yes I do see some in the 4th picture, just not very many)

    1. VERY. All the segments are connected by ‘Post Tension’ cables and are very resilient to lots of shaking. I’d worry more about roving bands of copper wire thieves.

  3. Parcel Viewer says the 1050 space garage will be located where SeaTac Storage currently resides. The ST owned garage will pay no property taxes. The Storage facility paid $53/year in property taxes.

    1. As a journalist, I normally proof-read my wildly-popular and respected comment section editorials. What I meant to say is the storage facility pays $53K/year in property taxes.

      1. Thank you for taking the time to look up the amount of property taxes that a nearby business paid. The figures are irrelevant to the construction of the station’s garage.

        The garage will be constructed on top of parcels 0422049148, 0422049179, 0422049238, 0422049253, and 0422049287.

        See pages 26-29 of this doc.

  4. Tim, I’m not sure what your point is. It seems like you just restated what I said, but in a different way.

    1. I’m not sure what you’re not getting. SeaTac storage will NOT be converted in to a parking garage (at least not by Sound Transit).

      1. I was speaking to property taxes. The CPSRTA bought the property the storage facility sits on. Are you asserting property taxes will continue to be paid on those parcels by the storage facility?

    2. Tim, thank you for that. Now, in your opinion, after reading all those documents, do you believe the storage facility continue to pay property taxes?

      1. Will continue to pay taxes? Impossible to say.

        Should continue to pay taxes? Yes, but at a slightly reduced rate. Parcel viewer says the lot size is 95827. Assuming that’s square feet and that that figure has not been updated to reflect the easement ST bought, their taxes should be reduced by 3.4% which is the amount of area ST bought (I measure a lot that is 333 feet N-S, which would mean a 3,330 square foot easement).

  5. Wasn’t there just some STB post about the Auburn Mayor complaining about commuters flooding the local streets around Auburn Station and wanting ST to pay the city compensation? I wonder if the same thing will happen when 1-5 commuters start swamping local roads like 200th and Military rd. to get to and from the s. 200th street parking garage?

    (I like this comment because I am both remember the past and thinking about the future).

    1. There’s no there there. Auburn is complaining about commuter cars filling up downtown. 200th is the outskirts between SeaTac and Des Moines.

    2. I think Sound Transit should start shuttles from the Auburn P&R to Auburn Station, and the Kent P&R to Kent Station. Both are the former Metro P&Rs in the area, and close to Sounder Stations. According to Metro’s P&R survey they are very underutilized right now.

  6. Different agencies, I know, but how bout using a good-to-go sensor mechanism for collecting revenue at P&Rs? Would be super quick flow of cars in and out, and drivers wouldn’t “feel” the pain right away… but they’d still supply ST revenue.

    1. You’d still have to have gates like those found at any parking garage. If you’re going to install that, might as well add RFID readers mounted at mirror-level that can scan ORCA cards.

      1. Well the advantage over an ORCA card is that those who don’t have one could still be billed via snail mail.

Comments are closed.