Over the course of about six weeks (May 7 to June 25), Sound Transit will complete five projects in preparation for service expansions and to maintain state-of-good-repair along the 1 Line. These projects will have various impacts on 1 Line service (Sound Transit) more impactful work scheduled for the weekends of June 1-2 and June 21-23. Summarized:
Rail Replacement (May 7 to to June 25): After 11 p.m. on Tuesdays between May 7 and June 25, trains will arrive every 20 minutes until end of service.
Federal Way Link Connection (May 12 to June 22): Multiple reductions of service between SeaTac/Airport Station (SAS) and Angle Lake Station (ALS). On May 12, Link will not operate between SAS and ALS until noon, after which it will run every 16-20 minutes (some trains terminating at SAS; others continuing through) through May 30. There will be no Link service between SAS and ALS on June 1 or before 10am on June 2. After 10am on June 2, trains will run every 16-20 minutes between SAS and ALS through June 21. Link will not operate between SAS and ALS on June 22, but service is expected to return to normal on June 23.
Columbia City Station Tile Repair (June 1-2): Trains will operate every 10 minutes between Northgate and Stadium, with half of the trains continuing through to SeaTac/Airport. The northbound platform of Columbia City will be closed on June 1, and the southbound platform will be closed on June 2.
East Link Tie-In (June 21 to June 23): Downtown Seattle stations will be closed from 10 p.m. on June 21 through the end of service on June 23. Link bus shuttles will run between Capitol Hill–SODO about every 10-15 minutes. On June 21 and 22, trains will run about every 15 minutes between Northgate-Capitol Hill and SODO-SeaTac/Airport stations. On June 23, trains will run between Northgate-Capitol Hill and SODO-Angle Lake stations about every 15 minutes.
Sound Transit provides no further detail on the projects, but they have assembled a visual summary (pdf here) of the timing and extent of some of these service disruptions:
Sound Transit provides guides for alternative transit services that may be of use to disrupted travelers.
As disruptions go, these aren’t bad. Two are on weekends, and the long one has thorough mitigations that limit the impact.
Is this the work of finally hiring Sparrman, a CEO (although interim) that gets construction?
Given that weekends are becoming higher-ridership days than weekdays, I’m starting to question the wisdom of that preference for closures.
I wonder if it’s easier to get drivers for the bus bridge on weekends. That said, most of the work is happening at night so it seems like Sound Transit has finally gotten the message that people are actually riding the transit that they’ve spent billions building, and are starting to consider themselves a transit rather than construction agency.
It’s probably because the bulk of the downtown and SODO work was done in the previous periods. The Columbia City tile repair is enlightened, two days instead of weeks, and north end frequency maintained. That could be Sparrman’s influence. The East Link tie-in seems quick, but we’ve never had another tie-in to compare it to, and the preparation work was done during the last maintenance period.
There should be a scissors cross-over at the “away” side of every station in the system that doesn’t already have one. That means that station work which demands closure of one track requires only single-tracking from the next “inbound” station cross-over to the cross-over immediately away from the station being maintained.
This is standard for “Metros” throughout the world; cross-overs just aren’t very expensive in the greater scheme of things.
I have to wonder if it’s even feasible to retrofit DSTT with crossovers at each station.
The DSTT has basically the most space ever for a two track rail tunnel given that it was made for buses. If DSTT can’t accommodate crossovers I’d be astonished. I mean of course it won’t be ‘easy’ but it definitely wouldn’t be relatively difficult either
There may be space in the stations, but what about the space between the stations?
I know it’s not good practice to put crossover scissor tracks inside a station, but I could see ST putting them inside Symphony Station and just closing the station when needed.
I also wonder if there is enough room for a middle third track inside that station, with connections to the side tracks at the end.
Regardless, I think ST should get some independent engineering advice on how to add at least one set of crossovers inside the DSTT. If ST can expect to build a new tunnel that’s several billion dollars, they should be willing to spend they money to come up with a crosswalk remedy and have the design ready to go.
Nathan, no, it is not possible to put cross-overs between the stations in the DSTT, or any other bored tunnel in the system. At least, not without making a new subterranean box around the two tunnels, disassembling the tunnel rings inside it and then building the cross-overs.
To undertake the enormous costs for such construction just for operational ease would be foolish.
I should have said “all surface or elevated stations”.
So far as putting cross-overs inside the DSTT three lane stations, yes, that would certainly work, but would permanently foreclose any center platform for that station. As Al stated, it would also mean that station would have to be skipped during the period that the cross-over was in use.
To the question of making a “center passing track” with a wye and connections to both tracks at each end, I doubt that the stations are long enough for that if the trains are four-cars long.
I do think that such an “extended cross-over” in the middle of Symphony would be perfect for a “holding track” to store two-or three-car trains from the Forest Street, South Federal Way or Wilburton Maintenance Facilities briefly as they waited for an opportunity to move into a single-track connection to an automated Ballard Stub.
That would allow the Stub to be responsible only “cleaning and minor repairs” for its fleet, dramatically shrinking the footprint for its own facility. Basically all it would have to do is store the cars not required for base 24 hour service and the ready reserve.
“ So far as putting cross-overs inside the DSTT three lane stations, yes, that would certainly work, but would permanently foreclose any center platform for that station. ”
I don’t think that the middle lane of the DSTT is wide enough to install the vertical devices required to ever put a permanent platform there in addition to having enough room for boarding. I guess ST could theoretically only install track crossings at the ends (like those now open on East Link), but with the higher train frequencies from two lines it could be risky. Plus the track crossings would have to create short ramps to lower the height from the platform level to the track level.
It’s one of those design questions that I’m sure ST has already evaluated at some level. Can anyone recall if it’s been studied?
“I could see ST putting them inside Symphony Station and just closing the station when needed.”
I can’t see the board making the decision to do so or even studying it, since it’s been refusing to consider many of-course ideas.
“I think ST should get some independent engineering advice on how to add at least one set of crossovers inside the DSTT.”
ST should do a lot of things.
“To undertake the enormous costs for such construction just for operational ease would be foolish.”
What do you think Link is for? It’s to enable passengers to get where they want to go, because the region’s economy, social/cultural life, public health, and environmental footprint are enhanced by that. The purpose of University Street crossover tracks is to provide more options to run closer to regular frequency when a section of track has to be closed. That happened at least three or four times in the past year — including weekdays at peak hours — and will likely continue to happen every year. Without the crossovers we’re getting frequency drops to 20-30 minutes and high unreliability (30 minutes stretching to 40, as happened to me at Roosevelt a few months ago).
Mike, by “operational ease” I mean “shortening the distance that has to be single-tracked when a station is being modified in some way” [tile replacement is the big recurring event].
The question I was answering is the one Nathan asked “If ST adopted the policy I advocate of putting a crossing on the ‘away’ side of every station, should that include the tunneled stations that don’t now have one?” [Husky Stadium Station has one because it was planned to be a terminal station for a while].
By using the term “away side” I was implicitly saying “not within the station” itself. I think that’s pretty clear.
I was answering “No, because it would cost billions to build those cross-over boxes and disassemble the pressure rings for the trackage inside them for the occasional use of any single one of them to shorten single-tracking.” Nathan was completely correct to raise the question.
I considered the cross-overs WITHIN Symphony in a different paragraph, including directly addressing Al in a part of it. In summary, I would say that what I wrote was in support of the idea but questioned the possibility of a full four-car “layover” facility within the available length of the station.
I did not mean “operational ease” in any other way. Please don’t claim that I don’t care about riders. The reply was in response to Nathan’s and Al’s replies to my original comment that said in short, “ST should have a cross-over at every station!” I would say that that comment is impractical in the tunneled portions but certainly “pro-rider”.
If I need to be more clear: I want more cross-overs so that riders don’t have to deal with long headways!!!!!”
Is that good enough?
Bah, failed to close the first bold section after “not”.
[Edit: fixed]
TT, which at/above-grade station pairs are in need of a crossover track? In scrolling through Google Maps’ aerial imagery, I’m seeing crossovers at most of them, but I probably missed some.
That’s to say, I think a lot of our low-frequency-during-maintenance issues are due to the lack of crossover tracks between underground stations in the original DSTT and around Capitol Hill, which as TT notes, is not practical to fix.
Crossover tracks would (presumably) be included between stations in DSTT2, which is likely contributing to the elevated construction cost. Mining out caverns for crossover track beyond the station platform is pretty expensive. If there are surface stations in need of crossover tracks, that could be something worth advocating for a Seattle-based “ST4” or similar, but it also seems like the construction of new crossover track would have very high short-time impacts (complete closure for weeks/months) for unclear long-term savings.
Thank you for closing the bold, Mike.
Nathan, adding cross-overs to at-grade track is a weekend thing. Entire turnouts come as panels that you can just drop in place after removing the existing tracks. You need a pair for a simple cross-over
I don’t know for a certain fact that entire scissors are drop-in — it’s a pretty wide construction — but it’s really just two simple-cross-overs with a diamond in the middle. Whether or not the diamond could be “drop-in” each of the four turnouts certainly can be.
Now on an elevated trackway you do have to be careful of the bearing loads through the middle. There may be structural elements directly under the “running” tracks which are not in between them. That might pose problems and should certainly be studied. But basically, adding cross-overs to above ground track is pretty quick and easy. Railroads do it all the time.
However, I looked closely and agree that you are right: most visible stations already have a cross-over set or a scissors adjacent on one side or the other. It’s just the northern two on Martin Luther King which don’t have either.
Over in Bellevue it appears that Overlake Village does not have a set nearby on either side, though there is a set between it and Redmond Tech closer to RTS.
So, yes, I guess that your observation is correct: most stations do have a set on one side or the other. I’d add something in the north end of Martin Luther King Blvd and a pair just east of the platforms at Westlake in the cut-and-cover section. [That obviously can’t be “dropped in” because of the height of the tunel ceiling.]
With a pair in the middle of Symphony that would mean that any work at Westlake or one of the above ground stations could be completed with just a short section single-tracked.
I do wonder why in ST reduced service so severely for the tile replacements at two of the southern MLK stations. They could have single-tracked from Holly to the pocket south of Rainier Beach and hardly affected the schedule.
How is a scissors different from a crossover? I’m imagining an X between the tracks.
@Mike:
I just found this explanation about crossovers.
https://rail-track.com/what-is-the-difference-between-rail-turnout-and-crossover/
A scissors crossover is one type of crossover tracks.
Mike, you’ve got it. A scissors looks like an X laid down on a two-track railroad. A “pair of crossovers”, like those just north of Othello in MLK, are separated linearly. That is, there is a left-hand pair of turnouts connected by a diagonal track followed by a right-hand pair or vice-versa.
“Handedness” describes whether the diverging track curves to the left or right when the turnout is approached from the points end. A pair of left-hand turnouts connected as a cross-over is said to be a “facing point crossover” and takes a train from normal American / Continental “right-hand running” to “left-hand running” which is normally out-of-direction. A turnout is “facing-point” when the train enters it by traveling over the points before it gets to the frog in normal operations.
A pair of right-hand turnouts connected into a crossover are said to be a “trailing-point cross-over” and restore the train to “normal” right-hand running. It’s “trailing point” because the train in normal operation passes through the frog before transiting through the points.
If there is only a “trailing point cross-over at a particular place at which a train needs to change on which track it will continue its journey, the train must back through the cross-over, which is obviously slow.
Some of the stuff in that Agico article is flat-out misleading in American usage. ANY “switch” in North America is formally a turnout, no matter if it consists of 90 pound rail on a narrow-gauge tourist line or a 155 pound rail beast on BNSF’s “Transcon” route across Northern Arizona. There is nothing about the load bearing of the tracks implied in the term “turnout” here in North America.
A cross-over is just two turnouts facing one another in two-track territory connected by a short piece of track between the two main tracks.
How is rhwre still east link tie in work going on? Rhis is at least the 3rd disruption being attributed ti that work going all the way back to connect 2020 in January over4 years ago. So much for renewed focus on rider experience
I think they had to redo a lot of the systems with the plinth replacement work. I am curious how much of this work will end up being refunded or otherwise compensated for due to the poor workmanship.
I ‘d bet that the courts will say it’s fundamentally ST’s fault. Several people have noted that during the pandemic, ST essentially shut down construction oversight, but the contractors kept building. Badly, it turns out, but nobody was checking.
There’s the complication that the problems were actually ID’d in 2019 and the attempted fix (grout) didn’t work. I imagine it’ll keep ST’s legal team busy for a while to sort it out. It’s got to be 10-100’s of millions of $.
Apparently ST was doing inspections over zoom. The taxpayer should not be held accountable for this. And whoever made that call should be fired. Ridiculous.
Thanks for that tidbit, Liam. I really don’t get why people in masks couldn’t have inspected the work that wasn’t going on right now at a given tie. There need be little to no interaction with workers on other sections of the trackway.
I think I’ve mentioned it before, but I was on COVID social distancing/monitoring duty at a large construction site in 2020. I don’t think it’s surprising that the large agencies were much more cautious about COVID protocols than their subcontractors. It seems that folks have forgotten how much confusion there was over what was safe and what was not – does no one remember that the CDC even discouraged masking in the early days?
Edit – further discussion of COVID response and impacts on ST quality control should be taken to the current Open Thread
I hope I’m wrong but East link tie in might be a bit premature since they don’t have the tracks in place across the bridge currently. I have been bracing for more bad news about East Link wondering how long they will wait to announce
I believe they want to store a couple of trainsets overnight on the stub to Judkins Park until the East Link connection is opened.