County Councilperson Larry Phillips
County Councilperson Larry Phillips

This is an open thread.

110 Replies to “News Roundup: Retirings and Hirings”

    1. Hey there John;

      As an advocate of hydrogen power, have you tried to find much in your local library?

      Back during the Arab Oil Embargo of the 1970s, the US Department of Energy published a guide on how to build a backyard hydrogen electrolysis unit, and some advice on how to convert your (multi-ton 1970s era) car into a hydrogen powered vehicle.

      Our library had a copy of this up until the 1980s, but I imagine today most copies have become unavailable, due to the likelihood of someone blowing themselves up.

      However, I think it would be interesting for you to find a copy of that book if you could, as you might be interested in actually doing your own hydrogen power experiments.

      1. I recently purchased the book “Build Your Own Fuel Cells” by Phillip Hurley which is fascinating; however, I live in an apartment and it would be better done with a reasonable workshop.

        Also, I’ve read that they are now experimenting with 3D printing fuel cells which makes much sense to me. I’ve contacted the author to see if he had any suggestions but have not heard back yet.

        http://www.amazon.com/Build-Your-Own-Fuel-Cells/dp/0983784760

  2. Ah yes, the Expedia move and transportation. Surely such a large move to a location like Interbay was not made by Expedia without a detailed consideration of transportation, right?

    Having 4500 emps there certainly raised the prospects of an Interbay routing for Ballard-DT service in ST3, but one has to wonder if Expedia received any advance indication of which way the data was pointing…..

    This all points to some sort of Ballard-DT-WS routing for LR in ST3. This is good news.

    1. 4,500 Expedia employees in Interbay two years from now. At a site with 1,100 parking spaces.

      Meanwhile, 39,179 students, 4,277 faculty, and somewhere on the order of 10,000–15,000 administrative staff at UW’s Seattle campus.

      If ten percent of those ~55,000 people live anywhere west of UW Seattle and south of the Snohomish County line, there are still more people served by a Ballard–UW Link line than there are by running a Commuter Express through nowheresville.

      1. Actually, the commute demand data that ST has published shows that the majority of Ballard and Fremont commuters commute Ballard/Fremont to DT, and not Ballard to UW.

        So the 4500 new Expedia emps would just add to already biased commute demand in favor of a more direct Ballard-DT routing.

      2. Except that of all the Ballard–Downtown direct routings Sound Transit is considering, Corridor D was by far the most popular, and it goes nowhere near the Amgen campus.

        All of the Interbay alignments have projected daily riderships between 17,500 and 27,500.

        Meanwhile, of the Ballard–UW alignments that ST is studying, the lowest rail option has a ridership estimate between 21,000–26,000 riders.

        By SoundTransit’s own data, Ballard–UW attracts as many or more riders than an any direct-to-downtown route.

      4. At least you got your HTML to work. Last time I attempted to actually use embedded URLs with a text link it was rejected by the WorldPress system as looking too much like spam. So, I gave up on attempting to do that in the comments.

      5. @Lazarus — the majority of Ballard and Fremont commuters commute Ballard/Fremont to DT, and not Ballard to UW. So the 4500 new Expedia emps would just add to already biased commute demand in favor of a more direct Ballard-DT routing.

        OK, but using your logic, we shouldn’t stop there at all. After all, the majority of riders certainly weren’t heading to Amgen. We should just make it an express (“more direct”, to use your wording). Skip all the stops along 15th and not bother with Lower Queen Anne and that train will move really fast. That is what you want, right?

        This idea that going from Ballard to the UW to downtown is somehow a burden on folks headed downtown is ridiculous. The amount of time savings by bypassing the UW is minimal. There are no savings over Corridor D, and maybe a couple minutes over Corridor B (the route you suddenly are favoring) –j ust count the stops. If there was no light rail to the UW, then of course we would run the Ballard light rail over to the UW, then south. But somehow you seem to ignore basic geography and treat the UW like it is a sleepy suburb, instead of the second biggest destination in the state (and growing). You seem to ignore the fact that areas like Ballard are adding employment, which further strengthens the case for connecting it the grid in an optimal pattern (otherwise, how will those millions of riders coming from Lynnwood get to Ballard?). The idea that we should make the commute for one group of folks great, while sacrificing all other commuters is ridiculous, especially since things change, which is the basis of your comment (OMG! Expedia is coming! Let’s run the train line over there!).

      6. Far more importantly, he ignores the fact that successful high-capacity transit is about continuous built-up corridors where multiplicitous overlapping uses converge, and not about anointed nodes puffed up by press releases.

      7. Don’t forget the medical center and its patients, the athletic facilities and its patrons, and all of the other reasons folks come to the U-District. Social services, shopping, food, whatever else it might be.

    2. 4,500 Expedia employees in Interbay warrants Light rail over 35,000 Amazon employees and multiple highrise residential buildings under construction in SLU??

      1. Which is just one more good reason to tap into the existing and unplanned use for our Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel. Branching at CPS to a SLU stop connects all the dots along the corridor to Ballard, via Seattle Center, LQA, Interbay and northward.
        But no, we’ll hold our breath and turn shades of purple for the next 40 years trying to get another transit tunnel funded and built under Seattle.

      2. Mic,

        There is no reason to assume a new transit tunnel would take 40 years to fund and build.

        Still it is worth looking at the nice branch in the tunnel we have. Need to get ST and Metro looking at if using it makes any sense. Also should require the convention center build around in such a way it could still be used as a portal at some future date.

    4. I don’t see that Expedia moving to Interbay affects the ST3 calculations at all. Over the relevant time frames, it’s assumed that all that office space (and other developable office space) will be occupied by somebody.

      And Expedia won’t always be staffed by 75% eastsiders either.

      Geography will win out over any short term blips in commute patterns. It’ll take a development shift much bigger than this to sink the argument for Ballard-UW first.

      1. I generally agree, but I think a full commercial buildout of those 40 acres could affect ST3 calculations, even if 10k new Expedia employees isn’t sufficient to tilt things at this point. While it may not affect its performance against Ballard-UW, it definitely impacts the various Ballard-DT options IMO. If ST were to decide on doing Ballard-DT first, Expedia’s investment does make Option B (Interbay elevated) look better. I love Option D (DT-Queen Anne-Fremont-Ballard subway) too, but remember we can build Options B and E (Interbay elevated and DT-Fremont-Ballard streetcar) for the price of Option D. I think it’d be quite politically attractive to board members to serve both burgeoning employment centers in Interbay and Fremont.

      2. Sorry Bellinghammer, you lost me with the talk of a streetcar. We need to get over the idea that a surface alignment in an area like Ballard to the UW would make any sense. It might work for sections of 15th, but from the Ballard to the UW? No way. It would be ridiculously slow and pointless (like our streetcars).

        The rest of your point is fine. Corridor B and UW to Ballard (grade separated rail) would be great, if it can be built within the budget constraints. I’m not sure it can. The latest estimate for the elevated line over 15th was a lot higher than the initial estimates (I’m not sure why). Besides (and this goes to Dan’s point as well) there is a better option:

        1) Ballard to UW grade separated light rail.
        2) The WSTT.

        Those two projects are by far the best value for the city. Everyone north of ship canal and west of I-5 benefits greatly by Ballard to UW light rail. Magnolia, Interbay, East Queen Anne, Lower Queen Anne, Upper Queen Anne and West Seattle all benefit greatly by WSTT. Some areas (like Upper Queen Anne) would benefit more by a different project (like Corridor D) but they would still have a significantly improved transit trip (buses aren’t too bad coming down Queen Anne Avenue, it is when the try and slog through Lower Queen Anne (to get downtown) that they get really slow).

        By the way, I’m a huge fan of Corridor B (the elevated line over 15th). I think it would be fantastic (a really fun way to get downtown). But given the latest estimates, and the ability to improve the lives of way more people with WSTT, I changed my mind and now support the two projects above.

      3. Bellinghammer suggested Interbay elevated plus Westlake surface, not 45th surface. A Ballard-UW surface alignment is impossible because the streets are too narrow and congested, and taking the Burke-Gilman Trail won’t fly.

        I like Corridor D, but B would be acceptable for cost-saving. Andrew Whitmyre’s “Corridor E” with a tunnel to Westlake & Mercer and surface on the Westlake coastline has some merits too. But the 45th corridor is !!!urgent!!! so we can’t have two Ballard-downtown lines without addressing it.

      4. Ah, sorry Bellinghammer, Mike is right. You didn’t propose a surface line for UW to Ballard. I stick by the rest of what I said, though — I think the WSTT + Ballard to UW rail is the best value by far.

      5. I have a feeling the Rapid Streetcar concept is going to be in ST3.

        1. Seattle’s likely to be fund-constrained, but they still want to serve Ballard and WS. It’s been mentioned that Seattle board members have instructed ST to look for cheaper ways to connect to the two neighborhoods.
        2. Murray’s sudden move to put transit-only lanes on Westlake could be a precursor.
        3. Murray’s said some weirdly over-the-top things about how great streetcars running in their own lanes are. (“That’s like New York in Seattle.” wtf)
        4. Dow probably wants West Seattle 1st.
        5. Murray has – not once, even when it would’ve helped him in the campaign – specifically expressed support for grade-separated rail to Ballard.

        Even though I’m a bigger fan of streetcars than most here, I will join Seattle Subway and all of you in pitching a big fit if this is proposed.

      6. @Dan R,

        Per your comment on a development shift, keep in mind that the 4000 emps for the Expedia site is just the beginning. The property contains 2 more (or is it 3?) building sites. The eventual build-out will put about 10,000 emps at that one site.

        Additionaly, DPD is likely (hint hint) to revisit the zoning between the Magnolia Bridge and the Ship Canal. Want TOD? This will be TOD on steroids, and will put an awful lot of people in that particular LR corridor.

      7. Have you been talking to your “experts” again, lazarus?

        Meanwhile, there are tens of thousands of people above the ship canal today whose attempts to travel east-west are stymied by the radial myopia of the “experts” you claim to speak for.

      8. @Jesse — For your first point, the obvious answer is the WSTT. This is better for West Seattle than light rail, and better than any half-ass light rail that would come to West Seattle. This is important. If you want the best project for West Seattle, then support the WSTT. Nothing else comes close. Unless, of course, you don’t consider the folks who live along Delridge to be part of West Seattle. Even Alki comes out ahead with a new bus tunnel (and ramp). There are only a handful of places that would be better served by the ridiculously expensive light rail line, and they don’t represent a majority of the potential transit riders. WSTT is not only a better value (by far) but it is simply better at meeting the needs of transit riders in West Seattle, let alone the rest of the city.

        But if budgets are constrained, then again, West Seattle light rail is crazy. Light rail from Westlake to just one stop in West Seattle would cost more than Ballard to UW light rail, or more than the WSTT. A lot more. You might be able to build the WSTT and Ballard-UW light rail for that much (it would be close). If we can’t build both for ST3, then we do have a tough choice. As I see it, we could build Ballard-UW light rail, which would benefit more people more dramatically then just about anything else we could build. But the WSTT would also make for a substantial improvement in mobility, while serving a more geographically dispersed area (Queen Anne, Magnolia, Ballard, Aurora/Phinney/Greenwood, West Seattle). If I had to choose, I would choose Ballard to UW light rail. But I could easily go with the WSTT, for political reasons. Either project would be better — much better — than any north south line.

      9. Also, it is crazy to think they would support really expensive (2 to 4 billion) grade separated light rail to West Seattle (next to a largely grade separated freeway) while turning around and running a streetcar to Ballard. That would be crazy. Ballard has way more people than West Seattle, and way fewer options (no freeway or busway to leverage).

      10. Murray and Dow will “solve” northwestern Seattle’s mobility problems with a Westlake streetcar over my dead body.

      11. I’m somewhat encouraged by the news that Dow regularly reads STB. Hopefully he’s aware West Seattle really shouldn’t be first on the list for expensive rail infrastructure.

        Hopefully he sees the wisdom of having the WSTT and/or Ballard/UW be the ST3 projects for North King.

    5. The Expedia move is just another example of how Seattle is growing right now. If Seattle was growing in only one sector, then running a light rail along that sector would make a lot of sense. But the “South Lake Union” growth is not just between Aurora and the freeway. It is essentially spilling out around Queen Anne, like a slow flood heading north from downtown. This would argue for a light rail line replacing the Metro 8, but that isn’t even in the planning stages.

      Picking a north/south routing would mean making a tough choice. Fortunately, we don’t have to. The best thing to do in the short term (for ST3) is build the WSTT. (https://seattletransitblog.wpcomstaging.com/2015/02/18/westside-seattle-transit-tunnel/). Nothing through downtown is even close to that for value. Expedia would be really well served by that. Part of South Lake Union (close to Aurora) would be really well served (that part will get a lot better, too, when the street grid is reconnected and folks can walk or take a bus along Thomas from one side to the other). This improves the transit trips for more people for less money than just about anything we could build.

      UW to Ballard light rail compliments it quite well. As Kyle said, there are a huge number of people who travel to the UW every day (and that number is growing rapidly as new office construction is built). But it isn’t just that. It is the combination of corridors that make it so appealing. The east-west corridor would become extremely fast. The north-south corridors (15th and especially Aurora) would become fast and reliable. So someone from Wallingford, for example, would have a pretty easy commute to Expedia (by going west on the train to Ballard, then south). Someone catching the bus along 8th NW would have an easy trip to South Lake Union (by going east to Aurora, then catching the bus to South Lake Union). Meanwhile, folks in West Seattle have a commute that is better than if we built a train line to the peninsula (since there is no way we can cover all of West Seattle with a single train route).

      The two projects (WSTT and UW to Ballard light rail) are by far the best set of projects that could make it into ST3. I hope they do.

    6. Degrade? Not quite. Presumably, most Expedia employees live in Seattle, so this move will make their commute much more bikeable. Seattle is spending a lot of money on bike lanes. Use them.

      1. According to the information in the articles, 75% of Expedia employees currently reside on the Eastside. That’s likely to change when Expedia moves though.

      2. But I think Sam has a point. Over time, that number will balance out. Besides, generally speaking, the “reverse commute” makes transit rides really bad for someone coming from Seattle. For example, the HOV lanes on I-90 favor the folks going the other way. Plus way more bus routes go to downtown Seattle versus Bellevue. I think a lot of people (especially those in Seattle) just drive. My guess is that transit ridership will increase as a result of this move.

      3. One thing to keep in mind, Expedia employees can more easily afford to move to Seattle than some non-tech company’s employees could.

    7. My biggest concern about Expedia is walkable destinations around the complex. It’ll need restaurants and other retail, or the workers will feel isolated and drive to lunch and bring their cars in.

      1. Good point. I don’t think it is terrible though (I’ve worked in worse locations). It is more isolated than downtown Bellevue, but not necessarily horrible, if you are willing to walk a little ways, it is great. I think it makes sense to stash a bike, and just cruise along the very pleasant Elliot Bay trail. From there you can hook up to the 3rd avenue walkway bridge (which is really nice) and connect to Lower Queen Anne really well. Or just keep cruising downtown, where there are a lot of good places (Belltown and the waterfront). This is where the bike share would make a lot of sense. Grab a bike, pedal to the waterfront and walk up the hill. There are a ton of places you could access that way.

        I think it is likely that if the area gets developed, that they add restaurants for this very reason. That is one of the reasons that downtown Bellevue, as well as various places in Seattle have caught on for businesses. The employees don’t want to have to drive somewhere just to grab something interesting to eat.

      2. Wow, Ross–how long are your lunch breaks? ;-)

        (I’m sure you’re right about the development of restaurants in the area after this move–and I’d be shocked if there aren’t a few food trucks lined up outside on day 1.)

    8. How much all-day demand does Expedia generate? It seems like the type of place that probably dumps all 4,500 of their employees out on the transit system at the same time.

      Put a Sounder station there and make that the northern terminus of Sounder South. That way, you get better through-town movement on Sounder anyway. Same reason you through-route buses.

      1. How in the world do you think it makes sense to stop Sounder in Interbay instead of continuing to downtown? That is a horrible idea.

      2. Sorry, I misread the Sounder ‘South’ and I change my mind – that is a good idea. Especially if they add a stop at Broad Street as well.

      3. Somewhere in the past I’ve made that proposal before (as kind of a future fantasy). But BNSF could handle the locomotive and railcar maintenance at their Interbay facility. Put stations at Amgen, Broad St. and 15th & Nickerson.

      4. If BNSF didn’t charge so much for their services, I’d suggest buying the old NP bridge in Raymond and barging it to the ship canal, and use it to restore (at least in part) the bridge between Fremont and Interbay. It hasn’t been gone that long. It was still shown on Google satellite view until maybe late 2009. The track still goes most of the way there. The bad news is the bridge openings would be terrible.

        If the Waterfront Trolley still operated, you could extend that instead and then you wouldn’t have to deal with the BNSF operating costs or the capacity limits in their tunnel. However, that doesn’t seem destined to happen.

      5. Amgen did look into having the waterfront streetcar line extend to their campus. I don’t know what they concluded.

      6. They’ve managed to really obscure the north side of things, but the old route of the line on the south side of the old bridge is still pretty obvious. The bridge would have been sort of towards the right side of this view and you can see the old line curving across and where it used to connect to the line that continued to what is now South Lake Union:
        http://goo.gl/maps/ibaij

        Today, it looks like the only thing in there that’s big enough for a Sounder train is the segment of Ballard Terminal Railroad that is by the Fred Meyer:
        http://goo.gl/maps/xbxES
        and you could sort of see where this would have turned north as there are a bunch of buildings with the corners clipped off them to fit where the old line curved northward. So, unfortunately it looks like the segment that went towards Fremont is too obscured by structures to accept anything like a Sounder train. However, that Fred Meyer lot at least leaves some hope open for a station north of the ship canal without demolishing anything other than the pavement people have put over the old route.

        You’d want to make it into a lift rather than swing span, but that has been done before. The old BN bridge over the Willapa River in Raymond sure looks like it is long enough to fit the gap in the ship canal:
        http://goo.gl/maps/84iJT

      7. Any railroad ROW on the north side of the Ship Canal is either used by the Ballard Terminal RR or an unfinished portion of the Burke-Gilman trail. Trying to extend Sounder north of the Ship Canal onto either property would be highly controversial. Along the south side of the canal there is a ROW that extends almost to SPU, although most of those tracks are derelict.

      8. The part through there by the Fred Meyer is Ballard Terminal.

        Nickerson at least gives an alternative to congestion on 15th and can transfer to RapidRide. The bridge is such a choke point it’d be nice to get north of the canal though.

  3. Anyone notice on the Westlake parking lot that they activated the new all day meters along the west parking spots up to Crockett Street? Now those spots are empty and the people who are clearly commuters looking for free parking are pushing more northward. Seems like a nail in the coffin of the myth that the cycle track is taking away too much parking.

  5. Please give a no for 130th station. Why ruin the commute for folk from Lynnwood and not address Lake City with its own spur, they can wait just like everybody else in this eternal process.

    1. How would one minute or so ruin the commute from Lynnwood?

      Why force Lake City to wait for another line at great cost when they can be addressed so easily now?

      1. IIRC, the bridge at 130th will have to replaced if the rail goes at-grade costing around $20m? Same cost if the rail goes elevated and no bridge replacement. The station would cost an additional $15m. Chump change.

      2. “At grade” along a freeway is really grade separated; it just means it’;s technically on the ground next to the freeway. The line will go under the cross streets, so the overpasses will probably have to be modified in any case.

      4. Too many stops ruins a ride. Try taking LR from downtown Mesa to downtown Phoenix, it sucks! If only they would have left a few stops out. Can make one drive instead.

      5. LES, maybe you should visit a city with real urban stop spacing.

        Those of us who are more practically minded will continue trying to tear down the notion that Link is intended to be some sort of gold-plated transport to the regional hinterlands (aka Lynwood).

      6. I can’t wait until it becomes a tool and not a toy, northerners are going to be bitching and moaning every time they come to the more frivolous stops, especially those wanting to go more than 10 stations. Like I said before, address Lake City with more productive stations later on.

      7. Normally I’m the one advocating wider stop spacing and how frustrating it is to go through ten stations day in and day out, but in 130th’s case it’s ridiculous. So Lynnwood-Westlake goes from 28 minutes to 28:30; that’s not enough tor people to barely notice. When ST said that the 4-minute difference between I-5 and Aurora would cause it to lose riders, I don’t think they were talking about people getting frustrated at sitting on the train for four more minutes, but that people would look at the schedule and see 32 minutes and a few people at the margin would decide not to use it. But in this case that has to be compared to the people who would be added with 130th station, or who will be convenienced and thus feel better about Link and use it more. I’m sure the number of people who would use Link with 130th is more than the number of people who wouldn’t use it because of that station.

      8. “I’m sure the number of people who would use Link with 130th is more than the number of people who wouldn’t use it because of that station.”

        Since ST’s ridership model predicts non-negative net new riders, I guess they believe that too.

    2. Ruin what? OMG…30 seconds, it’s a life changer in that current 2 hour commute that will become 30 minutes!! Whatever will the world do?!?!?! Nevermind that it would reduce commutes to 5k to 10k riders in North Seattle and open up tons of additional development opportunity and better allocation of bus service. But yeah, let’s make sure LES saves 30 seconds.

      1. I agree that adding a minute to the commute is no big deal, but the drive from Lynnwood to Seattle does not take 2 hours except under the most extreme of terrible conditions.

      3. “but the drive from Lynnwood to Seattle does not take 2 hours except under the most extreme of terrible conditions.”

        Which is happening more frequently.

      4. Too many stops ruins a ride. Try taking LR from downtown Mesa to downtown Phoenix, it sucks! If only they would have left a few stops out. Can make one drive instead.

    3. The proposed station at 130th St would only generate a net of somewhat less than 500 total riders. ST won’t build a station for <500 net riders, let alone slow down the commute for everyone else.

      1. For the reasons everyone else has posted in many other threads, I do not believe that estimate. They’re neglecting to consider the connecting bus service.

      2. @William C.

        I believe they think the bus connection will happen at Northgate or 145th instead.

        What they are actually neglecting is the ridership boost that a bus line that is actually effective rather than stuck in traffic would be, and the TOD that would arise around that bus line.

      3. Yep, what William said. Besides, if we are going to focus on “net riders”, why are we even bothering with Lynnwood Link. The obvious solution is to simply end at Mountlake Terrace. Every bus north of there would just go to an excellent station. So, basically, there is no “net rider” increase by going further north.

        But further north we go. Part of the reason is because we can improve the bus system. Now Snohomish County doesn’t have to spend so much money sending buses down I-5. With that money, they can provide much better bus service, which will in turn lead to higher Link ridership. Of course, in some cases (such as when a station is not close to the freeway) there is a significant increase in speed (for those who can walk to the station or take a bus to it).

        The case for the 130th station is stronger than that, because there is no obvious alternative. Mountlake Terrace is the first station north of downtown that would work as a good feeder station. Northgate is terrible. 145th is bad, too, and to the north of Lake City. This means that the lack of a station costs each rider 10 minutes or so, while the bus slogs its way somewhere. The whole point of building Link is to provide speed — speed for those using the system. To throw away a station that would increase speed dramatically over the alternatives is just stupid.

      4. The EIS says the station would mostly divert passengers from neighboring stations and not add many. It doesn’t mention travel time as a major hurdle, nor does it have a rigid cutoff like 500. It just says that the ST Board would have to certify that the station is “consistent with the ST2 plan”. That means the totality of ST2 as promised to voters, of which Lynnwood-Seattle travel time is just one factor.

      5. When Buffalo first opened their light rail line, the ridership was horrible. After looking at their problem, they figured out that the line itself was quite a bit more popular than they had estimated (the walk-up passengers were quite numerous). However, they found that the failure was the bus system failed to deliver anywhere near the number of connecting passengers.

        So, please don’t underestimate the impact of making bus connections a bit better or a bit worse.
        Bad bus connections have sunk lines in the past.

      6. “and the TOD that would arise around that bus line.”

        And the TOD already at either end of the possible bus line – Lake City on the east end and Bitter Lake on the west end. A bus traveling on 130th/125th arterial is going to be a rarity – a line with no empty bus tail.

      7. The only way Mike’s “inconsistent with ST2 plan” would come to pass would be if someone at ST got a total bee in their bonnet about not wavering from the previously-announced locations, and then taffy-machined the data inputs and value assumptions to meet that predetermined outcome.

        Which happens all the time, and is why taking the stated reasoning of political actors at face value is generally unwise.

    4. OK, I’ll bite:

      1) Because it is less than a minute, not two minutes.
      2) Because some people from Lynnwood (and other areas of Snohomish County) want to get to Bitter Lake or Lake City (or other areas). I know several of these people.
      3) Because some people from Bitter Lake, Haller Lake, Lake City and other areas want to get to Everett. I know several of these people.
      4) Because Lake City has lots of people. More people live there than any place north of Northgate (including all of the places that Link will serve, even it continues all the way to the Canadian border).
      5) Because adding a station would save a huge amount of time for many people.
      6) Because it gives Metro and Sound Transit the flexibility to change their routes as they see appropriate.
      7) Because it would save Metro and Sound Transit a huge amount of money in terms of service hours. This argument, by the way, is the only decent argument for extending Link beyond Mountlake Terrace (feel free to refute either point).
      8) Because it would enable a much better grid. Without the station, it is unlikely that Metro would run a bus route along 125th/130th. This means that getting from Bitter Lake to Lake City (or dozens of other combinations) remains ridiculously difficult. This leads to more driving, which in turn leads to less transit usage overall.
      9) Because 130th is the least congested connection point for buses coming from the 522 corridor.
      10) Because history has shown that cites our size depend on good bus to rail interaction to be successful. A station here is critical for that (more critical than most stations north of Northgate).

      I’m sure there are more reasons, but that should do it. Look, there are often trade-offs when it comes to building a subway line. Put in too many stops, and it seems like it takes forever to get across town. But you have nothing to worry about with this line. It has skipped many logical stops. First Hill, a connection point to 520, etc. This will hurt everyone (including those from Lynnwood) but there is little we can do about that. But this station is not minor. It is not, for example, like a station at NE 55th or 75th. The trade-off for stops like that are a bit tougher (you gain less from them). But this station will outperform most (if not all) stations north of Northgate. The density maps don’t lie. The construction cranes don’t lie. Lake City has a lot of people — Bitter Lake has plenty — it makes sense to provide them with decent transit and the region as a whole a good transit network. Otherwise, we just blew several billion dollars.

      1. As noted in the comments last week, Chicago brown line, red line and purple line have a mixture of express and local service on the same four track line.

        If it ever gets to the point where there are stations every half mile or something, east Linsk trains from Lynnwood could operate as expresses through some stations with the north-south line as a local.

        Longer distances need to be handled by longer distance trains anyway. Maybe by the time there are more stations on this line the FRA will finally allow light weight UIC trains on main line tracks (like Siemens S70 “light rail”cars, which are perfectly legal to operate on European main lines). Put a regional train seating plan and a restroom in something like that and you’ve got the next generation of regional train for Bellingham to Seattle service, and it would be light enough to operate over this line.

      2. I agree, that is what is crazy about the argument made by LES. He is basically arguing for commuter rail to Everett. Fair enough. But that isn’t light rail. Light rail works best with lots of stops and lots of connections. It isn’t about getting from Lynnwood to downtown, it is about getting from Lynnwood to Capitol Hill or the UW or Roosevelt or — yes — Lake City. Not just Lake City, of course, but Bitter Lake and Aurora, and Sand Point Way and 35th NE, all of which would be made much, much better with a stop at 130 NE.

      3. (Vital subtext of Glenn’s response: “As noted last week, Snohomish and South King County are not the North Side of Chicago, and never will be.”)

      4. Yes, there is an “if” in what I wrote.

        High speed rail exists in a number of places, but nowhere is it successful if it doesn’t have a nice supporting cast of 80 to 125mph or so regional trains to help feed it. Those need good local transit to feed them.

        I just don’t see five vs four stations north of Northgate to be that big a deal. If one station is such a big deal then operating practices need to change. When I was in Chicago a few years ago, I timed a few CTA station stops at 12 seconds. Get 100% low floor cars capable of 65mph like Ottawa has, and you can have an extra set of doors to reduce the station dwell to that range.

        Let’s put numbers on it, shall we?

        MAX has a maximum speed of 55 mph, just like Link. It’s basically 4 miles from Lloyd Center to NE 82nd Ave with stations at 42nd, 60th and 82nd. All of it is beside freeways. MAX takes 10 minutes to travel this distance. 10 min/60= 0.167 hours. 4 miles / 0.167 hours= 23.95 mph.

        It’s about 9.5 miles from Lynnwwod Transit Center to Northgate. Today, the fastest way to do this by transit, at 7 am on a weekday, is to take an express all the way downtown and come back north on the 41, consuming an hour, or effectively 9 miles per hour if that is where you wanted to go.

        If this thing is supposed to be the all important spine, it needs to connect to a few ribs. This is especially the case since pretty much nothing other than Northgate and the Lynnwood parking garage are along I-5.

        Operating at MAX by I-84 like speeds along there, Link delivers that trip in 24 minutes, while stopping every mile or so.

        Though, the plans I have seen don’t call for 9 stations there. Even the map showing 130th only has 6 stations north of Northgate. This comes to an average of a station every 1.9 miles at its most frequent.
        http://www.soundtransit.org/Projects-and-Plans/Lynnwood-Link-Extension/Location-and-stations—Lynnwood-Link-Ext

        If six stations in 9.5 miles is too many, then then they need to figure out how to get shorter station stops.

        As to the rest:
        I’d not want to use the word “never”, as the Chicago L has been there for over 100 years. A lot can change with time. For the quality of life in the northwest to continue to be good, that’s going to have to include changes in land use.

      5. The bones of Chicago’s North Side — and frankly most of the buildings and uses — are little changed in the last 100 years.

        I feel extremely confident in saying that the I-5 corridor will never remotely possess the form or user volume to demand overlapping levels of frequent mass transit service.

        That is the sort of reality check of which I spoke.

    5. So LES, how would you change the Mesa to Phoenix line? What stations would you take out? Stations in Mesa? OK, but just just keep in mind Mesa is much bigger than Everett, let alone Lynnwood. It also has much higher density. So it stands to reason that a lot of the travelers in Mesa (a city of over 400,000) are headed to another part of Mesa. Tempe? Same thing. Not quite as many people, but lots of density. Maybe you think the line should just skip the university. No, I didn’t think so. Phoenix? OK, but now you are actually in the biggest city in the region. What stations would you take out? Are there some really poorly performing stations that are the result of bad planning? Looking at the station statistics, I don’t see any. Besides, as I said, if you want to remove a station on our line, then remove some of those north of 130th (few, if any, will outperform that one).

      It is almost as if you are arguing that the Mesa to Phoenix line should have skipped Tempe. Yes, that would have made for a faster trip. But the vast majority of riders weren’t interested in that kind of travel. That is a ride best left to Amtrak. I don’t think you get that. City to city travel is best left for commuter rail or Amtrak. I’m not surprised it takes forever to get from Mesa to Phoenix on the light rail — that’s not what it is for. It takes forever to get from Mount Vernon to Seattle and local buses. They take Greyhound instead.

  6. Hydrogen bus refueling station opens in Aberdeen

    Aberdeen City Council leader Jenny Laing said: “As a leading energy city determined to anchor the renewables industry in the north east, the success of the Aberdeen Hydrogen Bus Project is a real coup.

    “We not only have Europe’s largest fleet of hydrogen fuel cell buses running on the streets of Aberdeen, but we also have the UK’s first and largest hydrogen production and bus refueling station.

    “We have a very clear hydrogen strategy for the future and are on the cusp of realizing our aspiration of becoming a world-leading city for low carbon technology, while maintaining our position as a leading world energy city.

    http://news.stv.tv/north/313481-first-hydrogen-bus-refuelling-station-in-uk-opens-in-aberdeen/

    1. The Mayor of London has revealed plans to add two more hydrogen fuel cell buses to the fleet on route RV1.

      In response to a question tabled by Lib Dem Stephen Knight AM, Boris Johnson said last week: “TfL plans to introduce a further two hydrogen fuel-cell buses to route RV1 as part of the E3Motion project.

      “This is linked to a European consortium framework agreement and will extend operation of the other eight buses to 2020.

      “Ten buses will enable the RV1, which needs eight vehicles in the travel peak, to operate as a complete zero-emission route.”

      http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/8121

  7. Silly question but for northbound Amtrak Cascades trains out of Tukwilia where do I go?

    Planning on coming down to a Renton hotel for Seafair.

    1. I’d advise going to Tukwila Station. Or did you mean, ‘where is Tukwila Station’.

      1. Sure aw, I’ll go to Tukwila Station. aaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww you crack me up.

      1. Yup Glenn, which is why I picked the hotel. I can hop on that, then transfer to the light rail in a snap.

  10. Shoreline held off on zoning 145th but moved ahead on the 185th station area.
    http://www.theurbanist.org/2015/03/27/shoreline-rezones-185th-street-but-holds-off-on-145th-street/

    Broken logic of parking.
    http://www.theurbanist.org/2015/03/30/the-parking-contradiction-and-broken-logic-of-parking/

    Also, while other stations are getting new apartments, apparently Northgate station will be surrounded by new parking garages. :(

    https://www.seattleinprogress.com/project/3018742

    https://www.seattleinprogress.com/project/3015241

    1. One more argument for a station at 130th. There is a ton of parking at Northgate and it will be used during rush hour. This will make the already really slow buses very slow. If all the buses are funneled into the two stations, the whole thing will be a mess, which will lead more people to drive. With 130th, on the other hand, there is minimal parking and the difference between driving and parking versus taking a bus will favor the bus. In other words, if you are on Lake City Way and 125th, and want to get to Northgate, you might as well drive. You might be able to skip over the bus as it slogs along. Not that driving will be fast, but it will be faster than the bus. Meanwhile, parking will be pretty easy (tons of parking garages).

      But if you are headed to 130th, you should just hop on a bus. It won’t make many stops (four) between the two locations, and you won’t have to mess with parking. The situation is even more dramatic for folks from Bitter Lake. Either they put up with a really slow bus, or drive the back roads to Northgate (or 145th). This is not a good thing, and ultimately leads people to just drive to their destination. For example, do you think anyone with a car is going to take Link from Bitter Lake to Roosevelt without a 130th station? You are talking about a slow, infrequent bus, followed by a fast train ride versus a very fast drive (across 130th to 15th NE, then straight down until 65th and look for parking). On the other hand, with a station at 130th, the difference between driving and transit is minimal..

  11. Somewhat overshadowed by the 130th Station debate is whether or not to put a second Mountlake Terrace station on the west side of I-5 at 220th Street SW. I’m all for it, since it would be hard to fix the mistake later if light rail was in the I-5 median instead of the west side.

    1. Check the Preferred Alternative in the EIS. I believe it’s on the west side precisely to allow this station option.

  12. Has anyone noticed that they are about to pull the bearing block off Bertha and they have now totally concealed it in a giant blue tarp?

    I’m sure this has nothing to due with the weather and is instead a privacy screen — I’m betting they basically don’t want the public (or WSDOT?) to see the state of the bearing and seals when they open her up. Obviously this is a litigious situation, but how can the courts determine responsibility when one party attempts to control the message to such an extent?

    And if WSDOT is on site then why would they want to hide it from the pubic?

    1. Kind of like they don’t let the public cram around the corpse during a murder investigation. Any photos leaked could be used as evidence in a civil trial.

      An early story said the damage was caused by some metal bars left there from previous construction. It also said The contractor was not made aware of that. If both these items are true, then it might be that the state may have to take the blame.

  13. 1. Ron Judd: What can transit system do for people in places like Everett and Olympia until light rail reaches them?

    Answer: Get ST bus service to them as quick as possible, and make service as fast as possible.

    2. Everett Station? Regional disgrace. Remember when it was new, comfortable and beautiful.

    Answer: as with a hundred percent of blight in this country, put about a dozen new industries in Everett.

    Meantime, put the community college back. Put the cafe back. And add as many ST security as needed to secure the above.

    Security budget? Move the money the Metro Council is using to keep one harmless lunatic from disrupting its meetings, appoint a sergeant at arms, and deputize senior citizen volunteers to keep order.

    Four county police cars and their officers, multiple Securitas. See word above behind “regional.”

    Public commenter in question looks younger than me, but still old enough for social security. At City Council meeting, I yelled at him for insulting my elected representatives.

    But guarantee one woman about age seventy calling him down in either Yiddish or Russian would take care of the problem.

    My former martial arts instructor is also a sculptor and a prize-winning philosopher. So a Russian navy “seal” is much too kindly and soft spoken for the job.

    My recalling my Dad’s mom from Lithuania, on the other hand- probably against the Geneva Conventions to solicit eighty year old lady volunteer from Slavic language communities, but whatever Eastern European is for “desperate times, desperate measures….

    Dan Savage: Pioneer Square idea just fine. Especially if they can get the Waterfront Streetcar back in there to use the tracks that are still there too.

    But seriously, move the poor to the suburbs business is why ISIS gets so many recruits from Europe- until more of these kids learn that as in every army on Earth, recruits have to clean toilets and chuck their i-Pads before they’re allowed to terrorize anybody.

    Especially in France, widespread old European habit of suburbanizing immigrants made it easier for better-off society to ignore them and deny them work.

    Culture of our own country that, in theory anyway, we’re an egalitarian melting pot has created the USA’s greatest strength. A society of over 300 million people four thousand by twenty-five hundred miles across that can hold itself together no matter how lame its congress.

    While Securitas- seriously- handles huge majority of transcontinental law and order from Iceland east. Especially on transit. Ask people in Northern Italy what they think of whoever put Palermo in their country.

    Everett Station and Gentrification, same solution. Start hiring people and paying them enough to live what we all agree is a middle class life anywhere they want and- problem solved.

    Reason we had the American Revolution is that from experience, guys like Alexander Hamilton and Benjamin Franklin knew exactly what the gentry did for productivity.

    Mark Dublin

  14. I hope Susan Dreier brings some Lane Transit EmX type service to Tacoma. It’s basically true BRT as streetcars should be done: fairly frequent station but on a true dedicated right of way.

    Ridership on the corridor doubled in less than a year.

    1. Was great when Vera Allen was Miss Subways. Great dancer and really, really cute. If she could be Miss DSTT, we couldn’t stuff anybody else aboard trains or on platforms!

      MD

    1. Dean was doing quite a bit of ‘Horn Tooting’ from all the various transit vehicles meandering through the new S.King Co. HUB.
      Does anyone remember when Long Acres flooded out in that site, with about 3 feet of water covering the infield?
      err… Transit Hub.

    2. “[Tukwila Mayor Jim] Haggerton wants the Sound Transit to “undefer” its plans for a light-rail station in Tukwila at the Boeing Access Road. He argues the station is needed to serve the Museum of Flight, Boeing Field and Boeing facilities, Aviation High School and potential new job-generating developments in north Tukwila.”

      Oh.

      What kind of route is he envisioning that would serve those places?

      And the 124 already serves the Museum of Flight from TIB.

      1. I think the 124 does the job quite well. Says the Page Two “AvgeekJoe” guy who’s used it on his Museum of Flight runs.

        That said, if it were only a small extension of currently planned light rail/subway service to West Seattle… why not a few Boeing Field stations?

      2. Taking the mayor at his word (assuming he was quoted accurately), the easiest would be for the 124 to detour into BAR Station. That would give a one-seat ride north to the Museum of Flight and Boeing jobs, and south to avoid a gap between BAR and TIB Stations. (I’m also hoping the area just north of TIB becomes TOD someday.)

        East of I-5, the simplest would be to truncate the 150 at BAR Station. That has been a major topic of controversy here, with many transit fans supporting it and Metro apparently concerned it would add too much travel time. Does Mayor Haggerton really support this? That would be the biggest thing to get Metro to change its mind. Would the mayor prioritize it above a Burien-Renton Link/BRT line? That would help to get some low-cost improvements in south King County.

      3. So would having the 124 detour into BAR be an advantage? Detours are usually bad, but it is a Link station, and it would allow people to transfer closer to their destination. I’m assuming the station would be at the railroad track to allow a potential transfer to Sounder. Google says the walk from the railroad to East Marginal Way is 7 minutes. If the station were as westward as possible, that could maybe be cut to 5 mintues, which is fine for a destination but not for a transfer (looking at you, Husky Station!).

        Going the other way, the 101 could be truncated at BAR Station. That’s another major controversy, with transit fans and Metro on opposite sides. Could BAR make Metro more willing to reorganize compared to Rainier Beach Station? Or is it about the same? One problem is that BAR is an awful place to transfer, with absolutely nothing around it. Of course, some people might prefer nothing to the supposed gunshots in Rainier Beach. It would also be essentially a detour from MLK to the station, and then back to MLK on another line.

      4. If we do add the station, I don’t want it called “Boeing Access Road Station”. One because “Boeing” is a corporation. Two because “access road’ is an automobile-centric term: if we didn’t have freeways we wouldn’t need access roads. Until a better name comes along I suggest “Nowhere Station”.

      5. I’ve written an article about it. Thanks for alerting us to this.

        Editors, please delete my three previous comments.

Comments are closed.