Month: June 2014

by ROSS BLEAKNEY

[Update 3/30/2015: the author has published an update to this article.]

Keith Kyle wrote a very good article suggesting that we build a Ballard spur with added stations (which he calls “A4”). I would go even farther than Mr. Kyle and suggest that a Ballard-UW line would provide much greater value than anything Sound Transit is in the process of studying or proposing.  In fact, it should be the highest priority corridor for ST3.

Why Ballard?

Take a look at this interactive census map and zoom into Seattle. Keep in mind that the darker the area, the more densely populated it is. I think it should be obvious that almost of the dark (populous) areas are in the Central Area, downtown or the U-District.

Of course, population isn’t everything. People travel for various reasons, including employment, education and recreation. That criteria is harder to quantify, but since the UW is a major university, Capitol Hill has a lot of nightlife, and downtown is by far the biggest employment center in the area, all three rank really high on those standards as well. Given all that, it is no surprise that Sound Transit calls downtown, Capitol Hill and the UW the “three largest urban centers in the state of Washington”.  The UW in particular is growing, and will grow substantially in the coming years (even with current zoning).

Additionally, we must consider how light rail will interact with other forms of transit.  Looking at the census map again, it is clear that if we only serve the areas with really high density, we won’t have much of a light rail system. On the other hand, it is fairly easy to find contiguous, broad areas of Seattle that could be considered moderately high density (for this state).  While, most of these areas are not likely to be served by high-capacity transit for a long time, buses can serve these areas quite well.  Therefore any proposed light rail lines should provide good connections to the bus network.

Superior to the Queen Anne Routing

Continue reading “Ballard-UW Should Be The Next Light Rail Line in Seattle”

One of the most unappealing traits of many of my South Seattle neighbors is a deep cynicism about any government initiative in the neighborhood. It’s certainly a reasonable reaction to decades of policy veering between neglect and outright malice, but when it raises questions about something like light rail it can stand in the way of progress for the neighborhood.

On the other hand, it’s inconceivable that the authorities* would allow a major water crossing — say, the Fremont Bridge — to simply degrade to the point of uselessness anywhere but South Park. For three years riders on Route 60 from Georgetown to South Park had to endure a costly, time-consuming, congested diversion via the First Avenue South bridge. Fortunately, on Monday morning at 6am the bridge will reopen to traffic. On Sunday afternoon there will be festivities.

More importantly to us, Route 60 will have a more direct route:

The new South Park Bridge on 14th/16th Ave. S. will open for service between South Park and Georgetown at 6 a.m. Monday, June 30. At that time, two bus stops will reopen northbound and southbound on 14th Ave. S. just north of S. Cloverdale St., serving the South Park business community.

When the bridge opens, Route 60 will operate its former routing on 14th and 16th Ave. S. between Cloverdale St. and East Marginal Way S. Route 60 will no longer operate on 14th Ave. S. between Cloverdale St. and Highway 99, and on East Marginal Way S. between the 1st Avenue South Bridge and Carleton Ave S. Operating via the South Park Bridge is expected to save about 5-8 minutes per trip in each direction.

According to Metro’s Rochelle Ogershok, schedules on the Metro website will reflect the reduced travel time on Monday. The data feed to OneBusAway, Google Transit, and Trip Planner will reflect the change on July 5th. Metro is also printing new paper schedules.

Together with the “temporary” elimination of the VA Hospital Loop, the 60 is becoming a reasonably direct route that someone with an alternative might choose to take. With luck, these speed improvements might bring the ridership that would justify more frequency.

See also Brent’s comment in the news roundup for some sample travel time impacts and the fact that Metro cuts may fundamentally alter the 60 anyway.

* This failure is a result of multiple jurisdictions expecting the others to pay for the repairs, but I believe my argument holds that this would never happen elsewhere in the city.

Dominic Holden, The Stranger:

But politicians continually resist efforts to accelerate light-rail construction. The council has deprioritized the city’s transit master plan, twice freezing its funding, as if proposed transit lines were a novelty map. We’re currently stuck with the next regional light-rail vote likely being held in 2016—eight years after the most recent vote. Continuing to build a piecemeal subway system, by approving small extensions once a decade, which then take another 12 years to build, would take a century to reach most of the city.

Instead?

The council and mayor can start identify funding sources right now, fight in Olympia to access revenue we don’t already have, and then send a plan to voters to approve preliminary planning and financing. Within a few years, Seattle could pay regional partner Sound Transit to start constructing the lines.

It would be difficult—it would take the same sort of resolve and elbow grease that city hall has exerted to build freeways (ahem).

With Prop. 1’s failure in April, the city’s going through another round of angst about “regionalism” – when do we need to coordinate with the suburbs and when we go it alone?  There’s an undeniable appeal to the latter, and voting maps would seem to reinforce the argument that Seattle and its suburbs simply have different priorities when it comes to transit.  But one can take that analysis too far. The “region” did vote to support Sound Transit in 1996 and again in 2008.  When turnout is high (i.e. presidential election years), the region tends to come through with the votes. A vote to expand light rail in 2016 would have a good chance of passing, but it’s also possible that 2016 comes and goes with no vote at all.

Holden’s approach – for the city to get the money and pay Sound Transit to build the lines – is certainly a better idea than the last time the city tried to go it alone.  But transit is really expensive and funding it purely through local taxes would require taxes that are orders of magnitude higher than anything that’s been proposed since the Monorail.  It’s not impossible, of course — we’re a prosperous, growing city — but it wouldn’t be a slam dunk. That said, you can imagine many variations on this approach, such as Seattle opting to fund ST3 at higher levels than the rest of the region, or borrowing from the feds to accelerate construction.

Fighting in Olympia, however, sounds like an unabashedly great idea.  One reason why Vancouver’s been able to fund so much rail transit is that the provincial government’s helped to pick up the tab.  In Washington, all the transportation bills coming out of Olympia are road-centric disasters.  And WSDOT has shown almost zero interest or competence in moving people instead of just moving cars.  Perhaps if we all learned to ambulate by fuel injection, WSDOT would be interested in helping us get from point A to point B (ahem).  In the meantime, it sure would be useful if Mayor Murray, a former state legislator, would use some of his much-ballyhooed influence in Olympia to fund Seattle’s transit needs.

The Kent Reporter:

The Sound Transit Board on Thursday officially designated Sound Transit Deputy CEO Mike Harbour as Acting CEO as Joni Earl continues her medical leave.

Earl is recovering from surgeries due to a brain injury from a blood vessel leakage on the brain.

“As Joni recovers she has the Sound Transit Board’s strong support,” said Sound Transit Board Chair and King County Executive Dow Constantine. “Mike Harbour has our complete confidence in this role to keep Sound Transit on track to serve our region’s commuters.”

We wish Joni Earl a speedy recovery.

• The South Park Bridge opens on June 30th with the route 60 returning to its original routing.
• UW transportation professor Mark Hallenbeck says Seattle needs a “Nelson Mandela of transportation.”
• Seattle isn’t the only city that is growing faster than its suburbs.
• Erica Barnett reports on the visceral and not-so-disguised disdain of micro-housing renter by some who oppose micro-housing projects.
• The Stranger sure had a few words for Mayor Murray last week. Let’s not forget the failure of the monorail and the approach that some booster took.
• Sound Transit and Metro present various options for bus/rail service integration to the Mercer Island Council. This right here is how you plan for an integrated regional transit system. More details here.
• Translink develops an app to discretely report non-emergency issues to their Transit Police.
• Some people worry about loss of parking from the First Hill Streetcar extension to Roy/Aloha. I worry more about ensuring that 8-80 bicycle facilities are included.
• The Highway Trust Fund is quickly approaching bankruptcy, with the Obama administration opposes a federal gas tax increase. We’ll see where this goes over the summer.
• Only in the US would carjackers not know how to drive a manual transmission car.
• Fred Hutch builds a new skybridge and stair-climb between Fairview and Eastlake with a runnel.
• There is now a new way to get to the Tukwila Sounder station from Renton.
• Chris Karnes wants to see a Tacoma Link connection to Tacoma Community College added to Sound Transit’s Long Range Plan.
• Hey whatever happened to the Civic Square project? Let’s hope someone has a plan.

This is an open thread.

Tomorrow at 5:30 p.m., the Seattle City Council — acting in its capacity as the Board of Directors of the Seattle Transportation Benefit District (STBD) — will hear public comment and consider a resolution, introduced by Councilmember Tom Rasmussen, that would implement Mayor Ed Murray’s “Plan D” to save most Metro service in the city of Seattle by using the STBD’s taxing authority.

As a refresher, the Rasmussen/Murray “Plan D” would impose a flat $60 vehicle license fee (VLF) and an 0.1% sales-tax increase within the City of Seattle, after a public vote to be held in November.  These are the same taxes the defeated Proposition 1 would have imposed countywide through a separate TBD.  The VLF would be permanent, while the sales tax increase would last for ten years, the maximum allowed under state law.  The resolution requires the STBD to hold a hearing and introduce a resolution to phase out both taxes if the county acquires state or regional funding to replace them.

The plan would not prevent Metro’s September 2014 cuts or restore the service to be cut in September 2014.  It would provide “comparable [service levels] to what was provided by Metro Transit following its September 2014 service changes,” with any additional money going to buy new service according to the Seattle Transit Master Plan and Metro’s service guidelines.  Left open in the resolution’s wording is the important but politically difficult question of whether Metro would implement some or all of the restructures it planned for various parts of Seattle in February, June, and September 2015.  We would argue that, given additional funding, the network changes proposed in most of those restructures — with the notable exceptions of the extreme West Seattle “chainsaw restructure” and the cuts to Beacon Hill service — would be an improvement over today’s service patterns for most riders.  (Late edit: There’s nothing good in the proposed Magnolia restructure either.)

Another notable feature of the plan is that it would fund only routes with 80% or more of their stops in the City of Seattle.  This would prevent the funding from restoring or enhancing certain routes which provide core service to Seattle neighborhoods, particularly in the south end, but also in the far north of the city.  As it happens, none of the all-day routes in question (RapidRide E, 106, 107, 120, 124, 128, 131, 132, 345, 346, 347, 348, and 372) are currently planned to suffer meaningful cuts.  It is unclear, however, how such routes would be treated in any service improvements if the taxes generate extra funding.

(Note: Edited to make clear that the Licata/Sawant plan retains the VLF.)  The Rasmussen/Murray plan is competing with an alternative plan proposed by Councilmembers Nick Licata and Kshama Sawant.  The Licata/Sawant plan would impose retain the VLF, but replace the 0.1% sales tax increase with an employee hours tax (widely known as a “head tax”) of $18 per employee per year on employers and an increase in the commercial parking tax from 12.5% to 17.5% (sales tax, which is separate from this tax, is also imposed on commercial parking).  Licata and Sawant argue that the taxes their plan would impose are far more progressive than the VLF and sales tax.  They also claim the plan could forestall the September 2014 service cuts, although Metro has not said whether it would be able to restore the service in time, given that preparations for the September 2014 service change are well underway.  Opponents, which include the UW and most of the heavy hitters in Seattle’s business community, charge that the “head tax” would slow job growth and that the parking tax increase would give Seattle the highest total tax on parking in the country.  To date, no council members other than Licata and Sawant have indicated support for their plan.  While it appears they will introduce the plan as an amendment to Murray’s resolution, they have not yet made legislative text public.

On June 9, 2014, the Pierce Transit Board of Commissioners held a hearing (See pages 3-4.) on a proposal to eliminate paper transfers and, as a replacement, institute a day pass, available seven days a week. Chris Karnes at the Tacoma Transit blog delves into the process that led to this proposal.

Pierce Transit currently sells paper day passes on weekends and holidays, at a cost of twice the single-ride fare ($2 for adults and 75 cents for seniors, youth 6-18, and riders with disabilities). The passes are purchased at first boarding and provided by the operator.

Pierce Transit plans to change from paper to magnetic-strip cards and ORCA-based day passes. Using a $2 million federal grant, Pierce Transit plans to replace all its fareboxes with ones that can read the date on the new magnetic-strip cards. The proposal, which is scheduled for a vote on July 14, would also set the cost of the day pass at $5 for adults, and $2.50 for seniors, youth, and riders with disabilities, which is $1 more than the current weekend day pass rates.

In addition to the magnetic-strip card option, Pierce Transit plans to make the day pass available on ORCA, through advance purchase.

In contrast to the multi-agency $9 ORCA day pass pilot program, going on through September 2014, in which Pierce Transit is participating, the Pierce Transit day pass would only be accepted on Pierce Transit buses. Rollout of the Pierce Transit day pass is scheduled for November 1, 2014.

The Seattle City Council will discuss measures to save Seattle Metro service on Thursday. Immediately prior to a public hearing, the Transit Riders Union urges you to show up to a rally demanding that service:

With 16% cuts to Metro bus service looming this fall, the Transit Riders Union will hold a rally and press conference to tell elected representatives at all levels of government, “Fund Metro NOW!”

This rally will take place just before the Seattle Transportation Benefit District public hearing on city transit funding options. Mayor Murray has proposed a $60 car tab fee and 0.1% sales tax increase be put on the November ballot to save Seattle’s bus service. The Transit Riders Union will rally to show support for an amendment put forward by Councilmembers Sawant and Licata that would eliminate the proposed sales tax increase and substitute two more progressive taxes, an increase in commercial parking fees and an employer head tax. The Transit Riders Union will also call on the State government to take immediate action to support public transit next session in Olympia.

If the TRU isn’t your speed — perhaps because you prefer the Murray plan, or are indifferent — Transportation Choices Coalition is also organizing people to show up and testify.

by JASON SHINDLER

Recently, Sound Transit completed its Central and East High Capacity Transit Corridor Study (Part 1 & Part 2). Martin summarized the Issaquah-Kirkland options last week. Along with similar studies of South King County and Lynnwood to Everett, the Central and East studies presumably lay the groundwork for a future Sound Transit 3 ballot measure. It is just a study and not a formal proposal, but it would be easy to take this document and make a proposal out of it.

As an Issaquah resident, I’m excited to see a future where Light Rail is a part of the transportation mix. Our town is seeking “Regional Growth Center” status and has a new “Central Issaquah Plan” which approves projects up to 10 stories. Yet, this study’s Eastside options seemed to have missed the boat (or train!).

The study makes heavy use of options involving so-called Bus Rapid Transit – of the 8 options considered for Kirkland / Bellevue Issaquah, 5 are BRT. As readers of this blog know, BRT, at least as currently managed in the Puget Sound area, is frequently not Rapid. Also, Kirkland and Issaquah already have decent BRT options via the 554, 540 and 555/556 (which combined have > 3,600 boardings per day, almost half the ridership of the Sounder trains). It would seem unlikely that spending a bunch of money on new buses is going to make this service much better than it is already. Many of the proposals essentially turn the Eastside Rail Corridor into a dedicated bus lane, which will share some of the downsides mentioned later in this article.

Continue reading “A Better Light Rail for Kirkland and Issaquah”