January 26, 1929: Repaving of 3rd Avenue, viewing north toward Marion Street (similar view today viaGoogle Street View). The Seattle Tower, visible on the right, would open two months later. Item 3252, Seattle Municipal Archives.

Transit & Streets:

Land Use & Housing:

Commentary & Miscellaneous:

This is an Open Thread. Interested in joining the all-volunteer authorship of the Seattle Transit Blog? Send us a note.

110 Replies to “Midweek Roundup: The Year of the Eastside”

  1. I kinda wish Metro would just give fines on the first go if the fine is going to be $20-40 like how other systems around the world do it.

    When I lived in Italy, the fine was €40 + €3 which was the fine and the cost of an onboard ticket to allow you to continue your journey. Alongside the fine would greatly increase if you didn’t pay within x amount of time.

    https://www.at-bus.it/en/travel-conditions

    If the fine is that low, then giving the warning is honestly unnecessary in the first place. That may sound harsh, tho to me I feel it it’s honestly unfair to a lot of riders who pay their fares that fare compliance isn’t taken more seriously by Metro as an agency.
    Especially in light of what recently happened to a metro driver and Metro trying to fix its reputation as a safe mode of transit for people to use.

    Some might say I’m being a bit cold here on this, but for me as a regular rider of transit I’m honestly just tired of the social contract on public transit being violated to enable antisocial behavior instead of it being truly nipped in the bud. There are a lot of poor (or homeless for that matter) and disabled people in my same position who are transit dependent and probably tired of the fare evasion as well when it leads to creating other problems and safety issues on the system as well.

    Fines on the first go would ensure better compliance, because having no wiggle room means most people will comply after getting their first fine and people will figure out quickly that they can’t evade fare with Metro.

    For an example with another US city, Metro Transit in the Twin Cities has fines on the first go with opportunity for reducing the fine or appeal depending on the circumstances, and increases the severity of penalty with each citation up to a ban from the system for 2 to 4 months depending on the violation.

    https://www.metrotransit.org/citations

    1. “Especially in light of what recently happened to a metro driver”

      What happens to Metro drivers is why they don’t strictly enforce fares and they’ll give a free ride if you ask. It’s not just this stabbing: there have been other assaults over fares. There’s also a driver shortage, so Metro can’t do anything that makes drivers feel less safe and hinders recruitment, as forcing them to insist on fares or throwing non-payers off would.

      Who imposes fines in other countries? Do they have more fare inspectors per capita? Do they have more police on buses?

      Unlike Europe, the US is a high-inequality society with shockingly deep poverty. Much of that is due to racial bias, as those who impose austerity on poor whites imagine that they’re only affecting poor blacks and immigrants and immoral people. This creates an essential-service gap if you strictly enforce fares: low-income people need to get to jobs, homeless people need to get to services. The high inequality creates stress and resentment. When you have to spend two hours commuting to two jobs 80 hours a week and don’t get enough sleep, you get frustrated and irritable. This has now coalesced into a political movement for “equity”, which prevents the government from being heavy-handed about fares.

      In order to have strict fare enforcement, you’d have to have a political movement larger than the equity movement. That would be easy in red states but not here.

      1. This is a complaint over 5 years old now – that was the last time I lived in Seattle, and the last time I’ll ever live in Seattle – but I’m a person who stopped paying my daily bus commute fare over the last few months I lived there. Since I doubt anyone else who has failed to pay a bus fare will ever comment here, I will cover those bases.

        My reason was, I was sick and tired of trying to make the ORCA card work. I’ve always been a low-tech person, with a debit card I wasn’t super good at using in my younger years (and I had an evil bank, story to follow). I would buy an ORCA card, set up the autopay, and then my checking account would dip too low just as the autopay would try to charge–and then the ORCA card would cease to work, usually to my complete shock as I was rushing to work. I was never able to sign back in to my account on the damned !@#$hole of a website they used back then. So I would throw the original card away, buy another ORCA card, load it at the light rail machines, eventually get around to setting up the autopay once more, and… bam! Get got again.

        It turns out that my bank was specifically grouping my autopayments onto a single day late in the month so that I would almost certainly overdraft, and then they charged me $10 for every charge I made on the card before I realized what had happened (and they rolled my charges into my savings account, so that could go on for several days). Wells Fargo, if you care to know. I finally realized what was going on, cancelled that card and went with a credit union. I got better at keeping track of my debit account, too.

        But ORCA cards continued to be a goddamned pain. I was gunshy of that awful website. It was hard to get to the limited existing machines that could load up my existing ORCA card in the only way that was reliable. Cash was never in my pockets in the right amounts. Once I knew I was leaving the city soon, I quit even trying.

        I was taken off the bus a couple of time during fare checks and lectured at by fare officers, and I recall I was written up once or twice. I did not bother to pay the fine. I’ll be honest, I considered–and consider–my refusal to pay the fine to be a fine in reverse to Seattle itself. If they wanted MY MONEY, they needed to make it easier to GIVE IT TO THEM.

        In every case in which I was taken off the bus for non-payment, I had the fare amount (and much more!) available on my debit card, sitting in my wallet, in my coat pocket. (The people who were dragged off the bus alongside me were never–to put it mildly–in the same situation.) If they had handed me a damn card reader, I would have paid promptly. I would have paid upon entering the bus, in fact. Every. Single. Time.

        I have never heard what I consider to be an acceptable answer as to why every single city bus does not have a card reader at the door, which can accept all major debit and credit cards, in order to pay one’s fare.

        Apparently there was an overhaul of the ORCA system and now you can pay with a smartphone or Apple Pay or whatever? That’s very nice, and also eye-poppingly discriminatory against the poor. I don’t own a smartphone by choice, but also by choice, I get to see how the population which can’t afford one is forced to live.

        Don’t worry, I am long gone, and my scofflaw ways are far away from Seattle. (I happily pay for the bus in Spokane–their website is quite pleasantly designed, I find.) But given my lived experiences, I don’t think there’s a lot of room for the city which designed the ORCA card to get huffy about fare collection.

      2. spokaneresident,

        Thanks for stopping by. Yeah, ORCA sucks and there really isn’t a way to defend it. Yet some transit apologists do all the time. The same with dirty buses, or crazy people ruining the experience of paying riders.

        All of the bullshit makes people give up and drive. That’s the sad part. What many posters on this blog forget is… 1. You can’t make people ride transit. and 2. If it’s not safe, clean and somewhat easy… people won’t ride.

        As a long time Tacoma guy, I’ve always felt a bond with Spokane. It’s a nice city that has a bright future. Good luck!

      3. So you were too lazy to properly use the orca card and just decided that you wouldn’t pay, then got mad that the enforcement process didn’t accommodate you, who didn’t pay when you could have. If you didn’t want to use the orca then you could have done what everybody did before it was introduced: use cash. Don’t blame the system for your own laziness.

        Adding the option to use an orca with google wallet or manage funds with the app is hardly discriminatory. It’s just another option for people to use. What else are they supposed to do, give you a smartphone so you can have an easier time when you could just use the orca machine? Just admit you didn’t care enough to properly pay and save us all the headache.

    2. Most of the fare revenue comes from businesses that provide free or subsidized monthly passes to their employees.

      We recently heard from one of our writers how ST is still giving out warnings to some riders with clear-and-obvious proof of pre-payment. I don’t know if Metro has largely avoided such problems, but just checking on RapidRide is a much smaller data set.

      ST still has not acknowledged within its data that some amount (probably in the range of 1-4 percent) are false positives. But they have a process for challenge. Once Metro enlarges its fare enforcement, it, too, will need a challenge process.

      The fine needs to be high enough to make intentional non-payment a losing bet. And the consequences of not paying the fine (after losing any challenges) need to make paying the fine something that is to riders’ advantage. But a $100+ fine, like one for driving infractions, was too high.

      I don’t know how to get the math right, but I do welcome the push to get youth riders to get youth ORCA cards, not just to compete harder for state funds, but also to reduce the anonymity of who is riding. People have a right to privacy. People have a right to access to public transit. People do not have the right to anonymity on the bus. The kid who shot a sleeping passenger in the head on the bus ruined it for everyone. But there is no going back to the days of passengers behaving boorishly on the bus without consequences.

      1. Brent White,

        I’m more of a law and order person myself, but I think the Washington Supreme Court would disagree with you. People DO have the right to anonymity on the bus. Sound Transit and Metro don’t have the right to track my movements though an ORCA card and there is absolutely no reason to ever show your I.D. to anyone on public transit. Or at least that the court’s view. Can you see the State Legislature passing a transit I.D. law?

        I can’t imagine getting a ORCA card if I was currently a teenager. Currently kids don’t really get in trouble for smoking weed or tagging shit, so getting them to use an ORCA card isn’t going to be easy.

        Crime and bad behavior on transit isn’t the fault of Metro or Sound Transit, it’s what Seattle, as a city, decides to put up with. Any call to curb the filth, vandalism or general public insanity seems to met with chorus of boos from the far Left, so currently building log cabins or mining for gold in public park are just barely against the law… So transit scofflaws have little to worry about. https://komonews.com/news/local/seattle-homeless-man-arrested-again-steve-irwin-banned-city-parks-jose-rizal-police-department-spd-law-enforcement-excavator-washington-state-king-county

      2. > reduce the anonymity of who is riding

        Yeah, no, I’m not going to use a bus pass at all if I can’t do it anonymously; I’d just go back to paying with cash directly, instead of using cash to reload an ORCA.

        Clearly we have different risk sensitivities; I am not really worried about harms other riders might do me, while the prospect of centralized authority gaining greater surveillance power concerns me greatly.

      3. Mars Saxman,

        I thought the whole ORCA card with bullshit the minute it came out. It didn’t make things easier for riders. It did make a a massive department to run it and gave transit outfits all this data to manipulate. My travel plans are none of Metro’s business.

        The problem with Sound Transit is it’s “Boys playing with Toys”. There’s endless talk and planning for rail projects 25 years into the future. Even on this board posters constantly bring up these nutty projected growth numbers to defend light rail projects that in reality, have low ridership numbers.

        Meanwhile, in the present world where we all live….

        1. Pierce Transit has awful, unusable service.
        2. Community Transit is better, but in no way to be considered good transit.
        3. Metro Transit is stalled and underfunded, unable to hire enough drivers or mechanics to expand service.

        We don’t have enough drivers, janitors and transit police to run a safe and clean transit system right now…. and yet we pay millions to transit planners and consultants for “the transit in the future”. Let me fill everybody in on “the transit for the future” ….. it will suck even more, because putting out a good product isn’t the end goal of Sound Transit.

      4. Riders who have pre paid passes do get tickets. An invalid ticket is an invalid ticket. Sound Transit doesn’t get paid if you don’t tap your card. The revenue share is proportional so of course ST would want to ensure people with the pass pay when they are riding their vehicles. It would be absurd not to. That’s how the system works…

    3. I’d like to see an escalating fine with an alternate to payment for the first (few?) offenses. For example a $40 initial fine with the option to take an hour-long online course in lieu of payment.

      1. Why any fine and court action at all? Just ask the evaders to leave the bus. That will end their trip and is an inconvenience. The fines and court action have high cost. Keep it simple. Move the bus. Protect the operators. The presence of inspectors with uniforms and cell phones will help with security.

      2. I just read the associated article; I didn’t realize that fare enforcement was suspended. I’ve just noticed a fairly significant number of people skipping the fare and I assumed that the existing fare enforcement wasn’t working.

        I don’t really care what the solution is, I just want riders to pay their fare. If simply kicking people off the bus works then I’d be happy with that.

  2. @Mike Orr,

    “ the US is a high-inequality society with shockingly deep poverty.”

    Yes, but that is no excuse for fare evasion, or for violence.

    We have ORCA LIFT for this very reason, to support the poor and allow them access to services just like everyone else. But ORCA LIFT doesn’t work if qualifying people just decide to ignore the program and use fare evasion instead.

    “This has now coalesced into a political movement for “equity”, which prevents the government from being heavy-handed about fares.”

    Again, that is why we have ORCA LIFT. That program is supposed to provide equal access without overburdening the poor. But they need to use it.

    Metro definitely needs a more robust security and fare inspection system. And patrons caught fare evading should at least be escorted off the premises. I never understood why the agencies would continue to let someone ride even after they were caught without a paid fare.

    And to be clear, when I see people get caught fare evading they are typically not poor. They are more likely to be tech bros who view paying the fare as some sort of game. Nothing annoys me more than a tech bro who puts his laptop and corporate badge away and hides his wallet as soon as the fare inspector arrives onboard, then claims to be poor and not have ID. Poor my arss.

    At least escort such people off premises.

    Oh, and I once saw a 60 year old steadfastly claim to be under 18 and without ID. They eventually just let him continue to ride. No warning, no nothing.

    2. “when I see people get caught fare evading they are typically not poor. They are more likely to be tech bros who view paying the fare as some sort of game. Nothing annoys me more than a tech bro who puts his laptop and corporate badge away and hides his wallet as soon as the fare inspector arrives onboard, then claims to be poor and not have ID.”

      You’ve seen this? I haven’t.

      1. @Mike Orr,

        Oh ya, I’ve seen it. Multiple times. On Link only, I don’t think I have ever seen a fare inspector on a Metro bus.

        It’s really annoying when the first thing people do when the fare inspector comes is hide their corporate ID, then their wallet.

        That is why I support escorting fare evaders of premises. Because it suddenly isn’t as much of a game anymore when you get escorted off and end up late for your meeting with Bezos.

        And obviously I’m excluding the really destitute who are just riding to stay warm. That is a completely separate problem.

      2. By “escorting people off the premises” do you mean Fare Ambassadors should be granted the power to issue trespass warnings and potentially have police drag a passenger off the bus or train? And the the bus or train sits and waits for the armed police to show up and execute the arrest?

        I heard from someone once who told me he was told to get off the train. The train was held. Officers arrived, checked, and informed the ambassadors that he had paid properly. I can’t verify the story is true, but I will vouch I did hear it.

      3. @Brent White,

        “ have police drag a passenger off the bus or train?”

        Yes, absolutely.

        Scofflaws who evade fares shouldn’t be rewarded with free fares. Individuals who are found where they aren’t supposed to be shouldn’t be allowed to stay there. It’s just common sense.

        By all means be polite about it. Give the person the opportunity to pay the fare on the spot, or exit the train and station voluntarily. And stick to the warning system and non-criminal diversion systems currently in place.

        But if the person still fails to comply, then the fare ambassadors should call ahead and have security meet the train at the next stop. It shouldn’t take that long to forcibly remove a non-complying passenger, and you can always do it at the terminus if necessary to avoid delays.

      4. ” Individuals who are found where they aren’t supposed to be shouldn’t be allowed to stay there. ”

        The definition of public transit is that everyone is allowed to use it.

      5. @brent white

        I find that hard to believe. The only time that people are asked — not demanded– to leave the train is if they refuse to show fare or do not possess valid fare and do not show ID.

        The only time that a train would be held for security is for a welfare check or a security issue. If a passenger is not responding at all then they will call for a welfare check.

  3. Re the intercity bus service: Why is the state even funding the Dungeness Line anymore given the existence of the Strait Shot?

    1. They’re different routes. The Strait Shot heads from Port Angeles to Bainbridge; Dungeness heads from Port Angeles to the airport via Kingston/Edmonds/Seattle.

      1. From what I can tell they complement each other as well. From Port Angeles the Straight Shot leaves at 10:20 am, 3:25 pm and 8:20 pm. The Dungeness Line leaves at 5:45 am and noon. The Dungeness Line is better if you want a one-seat bus into Seattle (or SeaTac). It stops at several important destinations inside Seattle (Harborview, the VA, etc.). The Straight Shot gets you to different destinations west of Seattle (e. g. Poulsbo) but will work if you don’t manage to catch the other bus.

      2. The one seat ride to Seattle is expensive to provide, though. It requires paying for the bus to sit there on the ferry, plus the ferry fare, plus duplicating local transit on the Seattle side. This might be part of why the Dungeoness Line charges a much higher fare than the Strait Shot. If Seattle-Port Angeles were to ever develop into an hourly route, the only sane way to implement would be with one bus route that follows what the Strait Shot does.

        Another thing about the Dungeoness line is that going door to door all over downtown and First Hill also takes up a lot of time for passengers. So, even though the bus technically does provide a one seat ride to the airport, you don’t actually get to the airport any faster than being dropped off at the Bainbridge ferry and transferring to Link. The one seat ride may be more convenient for people with heavy luggage, but, as I said, that convenience is expensive to provide, involving sacrifices in both money and time.

      3. “… to the airport any faster than being dropped off at the Bainbridge ferry and transferring to Link”

        Just about a half mile of off-road luggage handling between Coleman dock and Pioneer station. Need them Wrangler tires.

  4. I just walked through the roundabout construction project on 145th and 145th is now open both directions all the way through.

    I don’t know when that happened, but it must have been recently as Google Maps is still showing 145th as being closed. The locals seem to have figured it out though.

    So progress! Now if we can just get the ped bridge installed at 148th.

    2. The status that Lazarus mentioned is stated as this:

      “N 145th Street between Corliss Avenue NE and I-5 has reopened with a single lane in each direction.“

      https://engage.shorelinewa.gov/145corridor

      Updated January 7 with January 3 updates listed in the description.

      They still have lots to do in 2025 and Google maps has it closed until October. So Google Maps appears to be in error or it still may have to periodically close.

      Fun fact: The two Shoreline stations have the lowest boarding volumes on the entire 1 Line. This does not bode well for Pinehurst/ 130th.

      2. I wonder if there is any data that reveals roughly what percentage of residents in residential TOD next to a Link station regularly ride Link. I know it varies from station to station, and the number may not even be known, but take the new Kinect Shoreline apts next to Shoreline North. The web says it has 240 units. I wonder if just a tiny fraction of those residents ride Link regularly? Or is it a more substantial percentage, like close to 40% or 50%? My guess would be somewhere below 20%. But, take an apt building next to some Rainier Valley Link station, and I’m sure the percentage is over 50%.

      3. Good query, Sam.

        Lots almost certainly depends on where people work or interact and whether the complex has free or low-cost parking available. So I can imagine that complexes can vary widely.

        I can almost guarantee that an apartment building a block from Capitol Hill Station will get more Link riders than one in Shoreline will, for example. Link is a quick ride downtown and driving + parking takes longer as well as is more expensive from Capitol Hill. Plus many apartments near Capitol Hill Station lease parking spaces to tenants at a hefty cost.

        On the other hand, the Shoreline stations have free ST parking garages next to them. Without those garages the station boardings would be even lower than they are. They also probably get a high percentage of rail boardings from several routes with connecting buses. These contribute to the overall Link boardings significantly, which is not the case with Pinehurst/ 130th — and that station has aggregate residential densities actually lower than the Shoreline stations because of all the low utilization public spaces (like a giant golf course) near the station.

        I think the full 2 Line opening will be a treasure trove of representative data about all of these factors. Each Eastside station varies from other ones pretty significantly, contrasting from somewhat similar land use characteristics found with Lynnwood Link stations (few apartments, few big non-residential buildings next to stations, free parking garages).

        Once later 2026 or 2027 arrives, I’m thinking that it will be a good time for ST or another agency (like PSRC) to do comprehensive surveying about all of these surrounding land uses about ridership as well as surveying riders about how the access stations and why. It could even change the basic narrative of how best to plan land uses around Link stations.

    3. Last time I was around there, it looked like it was periodically blocked with construction activities, but otherwise open in both directions.

  5. For nyc congestion pricing, some one made a bus tracker that checked if the tolls made any difference.

    https://www.congestion-pricing-tracker.com/

    Lincoln tunnel buses and queensboro bridge seem to have the highest benefit

    but most of the others didn’t really seem to

    Also anyone have any article ideas or topics they’d like to see discussed more?

    1. I’d like to see an article on the future of Stride 1. It’s not really clear to me what is planned/tenative/cancelled. Looking through some WSDOT documents it seems that there are still plans for an 8th St center exit and a route through Renton?

      2. I saw that post, I was curious specifically about the projects that weren’t mentioned in depth:
        – Is the 167/405 intersection still getting rebuilt? Or are there other plans nearby?
        – Are there any plans near Southcenter? I remember reading something about a ramp reconfiguration, though that may have been shelved at some point?
        – What are the plans for the 8th St center exit? It sounds like that’ll be figured out later on? The WSDOT page still says: “The current law transportation budget provides funding for preliminary engineering for the project beginning in 2025, for construction beginning in 2027, and for anticipated project opening in 2029.”

        https://wsdot.wa.gov/construction-planning/major-projects/i-405sr-167-corridor-program

      3. Sadly, John, the corridor still appears to be poorly cobbled together. And I feel like the biggest elephant in the room is the missing Southcenter connection.

        From my armchair view, the I-5/ I-405/ Southcenter area has lots of vacant land inside the interchange from which to add access ramps to I-405. While there are elevation issues to deal with, it appears possible to extend Macadam Road over I-405 to Southcenter Parkway with this new crossing having bus access ramps to the freeway.

        Of course the idea would need a multi-agency planning study involving Tukwila, WSDOT, Metro and ST. No single entity can make it happen alone.

        The I-5/ 145th plans are an indication of how to achieve change when every agency works together. Unfortunately, there isn’t such an effort at Southcenter. A plan was developed before 2016 and several projects resulted from it, yet there doesn’t appear a push to revisit things since ST3 was passed.

      4. > Are there any plans near Southcenter? I remember reading something about a ramp reconfiguration, though that may have been shelved at some point?

        The ramp reconfiguration new southcenter was shelved from the last time that I read the EIS. I do not know if they will potentially bring something back with the new i5 master plan

        > – What are the plans for the 8th St center exit? It sounds like that’ll be figured out later on?

        WSDOT is still planning on building it, in the last meeting i watched. They just don’t have funds right now but the i405 toll funds will eventually build it. The hov ramps are not planned to be used by any transit route that i am aware of though.

        december 2023 meeting if they increase tolls they could build it by 2029. If they don’t increase tolls it’ll finish 2039. https://wsdot.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2024-01/405167-EAG-Presentation-Dec2023.pdf

        > Is the 167/405 intersection still getting rebuilt? Or are there other plans nearby?

        There’s giant master plan for the sr167/i405 intersection. I don’t know how much exactly will be built. But for phase 2 they will add a general lane flyover from southbound i405 to southbound sr 167 so one doesn’t need to use the cloverleaf. then one would exit at lind avenue and talbot avenue instead

        there’s another phase after this to add hov direct connector ramps northbound i405 to southbound sr 167 direction.

        it’ll end up something like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judge_Harry_Pregerson_Interchange

        if y’all are interested i can write up a short article with all the images and diagrams. though it’s not too transit relevant.

        diagram: https://www.randycorman.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Final-I405-I167-interchange.jpg

        picture: https://www.randycorman.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Final-I405-I167-interchange-rendering.jpg

      5. @Al S.

        Yeah it is pretty disappointing. I wonder if there is any way to extend Andover Park over I-405. It would probably be horrendously expensive, but maybe some kind of overpass similar to Klickitat over I-5 could work.

        @WL

        > if y’all are interested i can write up a short article with all the images and diagrams.

        That pretty much answers my questions. I’m mostly interested in how any changes affect nearby routes, especially Stride. It’s disappointing that there isn’t a center exit lane planned near 405/167.

      6. @John

        In the next phase after the diagram above there are center hov lanes to exit onto rainier avenue. It’s like really really far away though like maybe 2040 or even 2050.

        https://ftp.wsdot.wa.gov/contracts/8811-SR167InterchangeDirectConnector/ProjectInformation/VSMDisplayBoards.pdf

        It’s the second picture

        it will allow stride 1 to enter rainier avenue from i405 on hov ramps. Basically rainier avenue for i405 will only be for hov ramps. the general ramps are moved to talbot and lind.

        Though this is a very very expensive multiple billion dollar project. I don’t know if wsdot will ever complete it.

    2. I think the long term impact of the NYC congestion pricing on NYC congestion is too early to tell. Whatever traffic reduction there is now may evaporate in a few months/years as drivers mentally adjust.

      I think the biggest impact this will have will be money help with the backlog of maintenance on the subway system.

      1. Every time the Lincoln tunnel turns into a parking lot, raise it a dollar. Find the equilibrium where there is flee flowing traffic.

  6. I don’t see how Seattle congestion pricing could be feasible or fair. New York and London are large cities with a large urban area inside the cordon. Downtown Seattle is small and the center of an X in a narrow north-south topography.

    If you toll just the freeway exits, that won’t get the cars that don’t come by freeway or that get off at an earlier exit to avoid the toll.

    If you toll across Denny Way, Yesler Way, and over/under I-5, that would harm the people in the adjacent neighborhoods who have to go through downtown to get elswehere, because the topography doesn’t allow many choices which streets to take.

    For instance, we sometimes drive from southwest Capitol Hill to Costco. Three routes are Pine Street – 5th Avenue – 4th Avenue South; Boren Avenue – 12th – Jackson – Airport Way; or 12th – north Beacon Hill – Holgate Street viaduct. The first two may require crossing the cordon twice depending on where the boundary is. The third is rather out of the way, and could increase congestion in Beacon Hill and the narrow Holgate viaduct.

    1. There’s 2 main ones “cordon pricing” (each time you cross the boundary and “area pricing” (charged one time once you enter the area). It’d likely be the latter. There was fleet pricing and road usage charge looked into but for fleet pricing there’s already an uber surcharge and for road usage (by mile) it’s probably too complicated to track.

      There were a couple different study papers. This was the most detailed one I could find

      > The variable fee structure proposed in the report ranges from $0.00 to $3.80 per vehicle per day, depending on the time of travel. The fee would be highest during peak travel times, and it would be charged just once per day for the most expensive hour that a vehicle traveled into downtown. According to the report, the maximum charge any one vehicle would pay in a single day is $3.80.

      If you just came at 11 and left by 1 you’d get charge $1.00

      It generally covered downtown.

      Anyways I won’t really bother making an article about this as while it is a bit interesting to speculate as the original reason why to implement congestion pricing in seattle isn’t really occurring yet. But it is interesting to see how in 2019 seattle was semi-seriously considering it.

    2. Tolling “the people in the adjacent neighborhoods who have to go through downtown to get elsewhere” is the point; the intended policy outcome is a reduction in VMT, not a reallocation of VMT onto other streets. Otherwise, you are essentially rehashing the same arguments as the Alaska Viaduct replacement, where the tunnel was stated “necessary” for people to travel through downtown; instead, trips will mostly disappear, not reroute.

      Much of the downtown congestion is through traffic because Seattle is an isthmus. If I could pick only one new toll, I would prefer to simply toll I5 the entire length between 420 and 90, including vehicles that never exit. Second, I would toll all of the bridges across the Ship Canal, as that is a more natural & legible barrier and are existing pitch points & therefore sources of congestion, which would both help raise revenue for bridge maintenance/replacement (makes the political case clear) and avoids traffic simply rerouting to avoid the toll (as already happens with the 520 & 99 tolls)

    3. I tend to agree with Mike. I see the idea of a Downtown toll district as applicable only in specific situations where geography makes it possible.

      The irony of NYC is that Manhattan already has toll bridges that are expensive to use. Why not simply raise the tolls?

      And to be clear, the tolling on 99, 167 and 405 is literally “congestion pricing” that we already have had for years. The issue isn’t whether to have congestion pricing but to have a tolled part of town with variable toll rates based on congestion for entry.

      Finally, I feel that the money for any congestion pricing should subsidize parallel transit operations. I have a big problem when that revenue just goes back into a general highway fund. I get that some is needed for maintenance but the extra amount raised during congested periods should be funding alternatives to driving a long freeway distance during those periods.

      I like how Bay Area toll bridges do that with the congestion surcharge and their other tolls too.

    4. I think an interesting idea to explore would be to toll the pick-up and drop-off lanes of SeaTac airport to try to nudge drivers into dropping their passengers off at adjacent Link stations and having them ride the train one stop. You could even implement a “Ride free area” on Link between TIBS and Angle Lake, as there’s tons of unused capacity there.

      Today, Uber and Lyft passengers pay a surcharge for airport pickup, but passengers of private cars do not, with the result being extremely long lines with 20+ minute waits at times to get from the SR-518 exit ramp to the actual terminal. Diverting some of the passengers to Link stations could help with that.

      1. What would move the needle is allowing extended parking in sound transit parking structures that now sit largely empty. I’m looking at you, Tacoma Dome Station. Charge $10 a day, so people can hop on link, the 574 or Amtrak (if going south) for a weekend trip, and pay $30 bucks instead of $100 -$200 at Seatac, or have no good parking option at all for a trip to Portland. Sound Transit gets more revenue, transit use goes up, congestion at the airport goes down.

      2. @Cam Solomon,

        “ What would move the needle is allowing extended parking in sound transit parking structures that now sit largely empty. I’m looking at you, Tacoma Dome Station.”

        I always thought the parking garages at Tacoma Dome Station were owned by Pierce County, not ST. Is that not true?

        ST generally has the opposite problem, too little parking. That is why ST has been looking at charging parking at its structures. To basically better manage demand.

        And I wouldn’t make any changes designed to increase parking demand until after TDLE arrives at Tacoma Dome Station anyhow. Parking demand will go up substantially then.

      4. Actually, I have no idea who own the structures. I’m not really sure why that would change the narrative all that much, though maybe where to point your advocacy changes

        If you charge enough, I don’t see what it matters whether it’s at capacity or not. I could actuall6 see a stronger case for allowing extended, paid parking if it were filling up, if priced appropriately. Though I would guess that people wanting to leave car their more than 24 hours are a tiny fraction of users in any case.

      6. Tacoma Dome parking is owned by Pierce, not ST. And I agree -for any parking that charges a daily parking rate, I think it’s reasonable for someone to park a few days in a row as long as they are charged the cumulative rate. I also think it’s good for people to be allowed to leave their car overnight and not have to pick it up in the morning to allow for drivers to sober up before retrieving their vehicle. But there will need to be some limit (3 days?), b/c we don’t want the P&R garages to be viewed as an alternative to the private long-term parking around the Airport, of which there are thousands of spaces charging $8~$12/day.

        Tolling the SeaTac airport loop should definitely happen. A ‘ride free’ between TIBS & Angle Lake is a great suggestion.

      7. “But there will need to be some limit (3 days?), b/c we don’t want the P&R garages to be viewed as an alternative to the private long-term parking around the Airport, of which there are thousands of spaces charging $8~$12/day.”

        I actually say, why not let people using Sound Transit facilities as long term parking for the airport, so long as they pay for it? I think a lot of travelers (myself included) would find Link quicker and more reliable than a parking shuttle that gets stuck in traffic.

        The prices can be set based on actual demand to ensure that spaces still remain for day commuters. My guess is that one Federal Way Link opens, the Angle Lake garage is going to have a huge glut of unused parking capacity, and allowing airport travelers to park overnight for a fee and ride Link one stop is much better use of the space than just letting it sit empty.

      8. My guess is that the “why not” likely involves some obscure law that prevents public agencies from competing with private businesses, like for King County Metro isn’t allowed to run special shuttles to Seahawks games. However, the number of spaces we’re talking about is so tiny compared to the number of people that drive to the airport for trips, I don’t think competition from the Angle Lake garage would have any meaningful impact on the business of the private parking operators.

      9. “Why not” because there are thousand of long term parking spaces in regular use, most of which park for days. Filling the AL garage with long term airport parking will displace transit riders.

        I am assuming the P&R will fill up regularly – maybe no every weekday, but it will for major events and busier workdays (Wednesday for hybrid workers??). If the garage is in fact sitting half empty every day, then sure why not.

      10. Uh… they ARE transit riders. And they will often be paying at times where the structure is almost empty – at night.

      11. Well, long term parking would be paid, not free, so whoever uses it would be providing sound transit more revenue with their parking fee than they’d get through dates from someone riding the train. Sound Transit also has the ability to monitor usage of their parking facilities and set prices as needed to avoid impacts to daily commuters.

        By comparison, the people who park there now pay nothing, except for a $3 train fare.

      12. “You could even implement a “Ride free area” on Link between TIBS and Angle Lake, as there’s tons of unused capacity there.”

        London Heathrow had/has something like that: a free transit zone around the airport.

        The problem at Tacoma Dome is you’d probably get pushback from all the private parking lots between Tacoma Dome and downtown Tacoma. Though, if those ever got redeveloped into something more productive, it might be a significant benefit to Tacoma.

      1. If you or someone did write a local tolling piece, I think it should be broader, exploring a few different tolling location ideas. What’s the main goal of each tolling location? Is it to reduce congestion, or to increase revenue? Because if a toll included Mercer street, that might actually reduce congestion on that street, but if I-5 were tolled, I don’t think that would reduce congestion on it. Also, discuss the pros and cons of each idea. And discuss if there should be any exemptions to the toll.

      2. @Sam

        For i5 tolling to clarify i’d probably just relay what wsdot investigated in 2012 with tolling the hov lanes and express lanes and what entrance/exits it’d allow

  7. I was talking to a friend yesterday regarding light rail extensions. He expressed skepticism that they are building trains to Bellevue and Redmond.

    His argument was that since the eastside is not dense, with many people being rich and owning cars, buses might be able to serve the area more effectively than a train.

    When I mentioned that perhaps they are trying to future-proof the infrastructure for future demand, he said that inflow into the Seattle region will probably slow in the coming decades in light of the tech bubble bursting. He suggested buses in managed lanes will be able to handle commuter demand effectively in a sprawled area like the Eastside, especially in light of the engineering challenges/costs of crossing the floating bridge and flexibility of buses.

    He said that transit should be a public service that provides alternative transportation options to people who cannot drive. In light of that, if they are building trains, the line to West Seattle might be more successful because the area is less car-dependent than the eastside (due to higher density and less affluent populations) and is closer to Seattle proper.

    What are your thoughts?

    * He also suggested that transit-oriented development in the Seattle area would reduce the supply of single-family houses, increasing the prices of single-family homes and making predominantly residential areas like the Eastside more attractive for people seeking to live in “houses with a backyard and a garage,” further lessening the effective of trains in the area.

    1. That’s a pretty dated view of the East Link corridor.

      Downtown Bellevue has many tall buildings. The employment density is not unlike much of Downtown Chicago or much of Manhattan. And there are blocks and blocks of apartment buildings over 6 floors there.

      The Spring District, Downtown Redmond and Overlake Village have dense residential districts as well.

      East Main, BelRed, Marymoor Village have major tall developments at various stages of planning or construction with some now open.

      It has more happening around stations than either Lynnwood Link or Federal Way Link extensions do.

      The level of development is notable in that there are very few park and ride garages happening on the line compared with other Link branches. The only major new ones are at Marymoor and South Bellevue. East Link doesn’t need those thousands of extra park and ride spaces to generate riders.

    2. At this point, West Seattle is more single family home dominated than most of the Eastside light rail stations. West Seattle does have good bus ridership, but much of it is coming from points further south that will not necessarily benefit from West Seattle Link. They really had to send the light rail down Delridge instead of tunneling to the Junction to benefit more of the current bus riders. Then there is the transfer situation for the decade of so when it will be a stub line.

    3. The idea of every middle class family wanting a single family house is also very dated. Most households are not two married adults with children wanting to play in the yard. It’s time, effort and money to have a spacious yard if you are single or a childless couple — especially if you work long hours or are a senior with age-related mobility limitations.

      Just because someone was raised between 1945 and 1985 thought that a single family home on a big lot should be the standard doesn’t mean that what people want in the future. And after decades of creating them, the vast supply of single family homes will last us for many more decades. We just don’t need more to serve the market. In contrast there have been a large body of experts encouraging adding what is termed the “missing middle” housing types like townhomes, large flats and such.

      Finally, the US added 115 million people since 1980 (45 years). It is projected to peak in another 45 years with only about 37 million more (or about 1/3 of what we have witnessed in the past 45 years). Grown is going to slow down considerably. Annual growth nationally in 2040 is expected to be half of what it is in 2025. And many counties in the US are already losing population.

      1. Al S.

        Ah, what country are we talking about?? Even in Seattle, candidates running for Mayor are always for “more home ownership”. The lack of land in Seattle makes condos or townhomes more palatable to the public…. but America is still a nation of “Little pink houses with white picket fences”. Home ownership is a big part of our National Mythology.

        I don’t have an over abundance of wealth, but I do have a house… with a great guest bedroom…. a home office… with a bike shop in the garage…. with plenty of storage for my fishing and camping gear…. and big dining room table for ny holiday get-together. What’s all that worth? I don’t judge people for their lifestyle choices… but if I wouldn’t have owned a house, I doubt I would have stayed married, and I would have consumed a lot more booze and dope. Where would that leave me?

        The whole “missing middle” housing thing just isn’t really true. The idea of building 4 or 6 unit buildings in residential Seattle is an idea the crew at “The Urbanist” loves, but builders just can’t make any money from it. There isn’t any empty land left in Seattle to infill.

        I’ve written this on this blog, and I’m writing it again. Seattle is pretty much built out. I don’t care what the armchair urban planners think, I know builders and some of the finance behind it. It’s getting tougher and tougher to make money building in Seattle. With Trump in the White House, I suspect the Seattle Housing Boom is pretty much over and the growth will be mostly in Red States. Because building houses in Texas is easier than messing around with “missing middle” housing in any Liberal city. That’s the story of America… we are a Nation of housing booms.

      2. “ Even in Seattle, candidates running for Mayor are always for “more home ownership”.

        Since when do all homes have to be single family detached buildings with land around them? Condos, townhouses, duplexes, ADU’s and other building types are still “homes” to those that live in them.

      3. I agree to extent that zoning and regulations make margins for developers smaller in Seattle than in Odessa.

        The focus should then be to improve the zoning and regulations. Not move to Odessa.

      4. This one size fits all that everyone wants a single family house is a joke. People have different values and its a wide spectrum, yes some want a single family house no matter what and will live anywhere they need to to get it. Many/most have trade offs of things they want that are more important than the hyper idealized single family house with a white picket fence on a 1 acre lot. Maybe they do want to own but find a townhouse or condo works best for them and their needs. Maybe they don’t want to own at all.

      5. @tacommee

        > Because building houses in Texas is easier than messing around with “missing middle” housing in any Liberal city.

        Why don’t you campaign on that in Seattle then. “If you want a house move to a different state” I wonder how you’ll do in the polls.

      6. “Ah, what country are we talking about??”
        The same country you live in. You just have a very rose colored nostalgia for 1950s American suburbs, even though it’s 2025, and times have changed as to what people want. Maybe get with the times that people are okay with condos, townhomes, and row houses instead of clinging to a very outdated view on housing like you keep trying to drum on about here. No one is going to move elsewhere for work, so stop [bleep] about what you think people want when the reality is actually different to what you’re thinking.

        “Why don’t you campaign on that in Seattle then. “If you want a house move to a different state” I wonder how you’ll do in the polls.”
        Very badly and ignores how much community building is important to neighborhoods, including welcoming in new people to the neighborhood instead of fighting against it.

        Some people need to let go of things staying the same in stasis forever as if their neighborhood is frozen in amber and is their personal museum of nostalgia to muse upon forever. There’s things I miss from my childhood that aren’t as popular as they once were, but life goes on as well and there’s new things to try as well that I’ve come to like and enjoy.

        Like I asked my parents who are both in their 70s if they’d be against building new apartment buildings in our neighborhood and they generally said no other than musing about the typical infrastructure issues like parking, utilities, etc because that is a valid question to ask as to how that be handled. They see that it would benefit the neighborhood if new construction was built and seeing a neighborhood improve instead of staying stagnant. No one is expecting condo towers everywhere, but 5 over 1s are fine and add to the neighborhood rather than detract from it. Same with multiplexes for that matter.

      7. tacomee, I love reading your posts. They’re like from a totally different reality. I live in Seattle: every day I see massive surface parking lots, significantly underutilized space, commercial buildings that have been boarded up. The building boom is nowhere near over, and Trump has next to no impact on it.

        Whether or not the population boom continues pretty much ties to the success of Seattle area companies and their job creation. If you buy the AI hype and think there are no future jobs in software or in tech, then by all means, sell your property.

      8. Zach B, please don’t use offensive ad hominem words against commentators. I bleeped part of the first paragraph.

      9. Steve,

        Well, first of all the land in Seattle is high priced, parking lot or not. Second, old boarded up buildings actually depress building new housing. Paying a high price for the land, then tearing an old building down isn’t the way to affordable housing. So yeah, maybe Seattle is the A.I hub of the future, but if that’s true, why would anybody want to live there? I mean houses already cost over a million.

        There’s this wild idea floating around with Seattle Lefties that allowing multi-unit building in residential zoned areas is going to help. The reason this isn’t going to help much is a 6,000 sq ft lot in Wallingford is worth 1.5 million. Then you’d need to bulldoze a perfectly good house and put in the utilities for a 4 plex. Depending on the neighborhood, that’s a lot prep cost of say, 350k to 500k per unit. That’s before actually building anything.

        My question is, “Is it pure folly to build publicly financed transit in a town where normal people can’t afford to live?”

      13. “…why would anybody want to live there? I mean houses already cost over a million” is a great recasting of the classic “it’s too crowded, nobody goes there anymore”

      14. When a house gets replaced by townhouses/condos/apartments, each unit costs less than the house. The aggregate may be more, but homebuyers/renters aren’t buying the aggregate. And more households have a place to live.

      15. “ My question is, “Is it pure folly to build publicly financed transit in a town where normal people can’t afford to live?”

        Transit is for corridors, not towns. If the housing around one or two stations are considered unaffordable that doesn’t mean that the line is a folly. Conversely, a light rail line is more useless if it doesn’t connect affordable housing districts to useful destinations.

        If there is a “folly” it’s designing a light rail line for only commuters that make it overcrowded for one direction an hour or two each day — and empty the rest of the time. The huge expense of light rail should benefit all sorts of trips — not just typical commute trips. Going to shop, going to the doctor, going to the plane or Amtrak, going to college (and even high school) and going out for restaurants and nightlife and special events should all be trips that some people routinely make using light rail.

        And to the region’s credit, Link generally does this. Saturday ridership is about as high as weekday ridership is currently. Once the next extensions open we will see if that off-peak demand stays as strong. I’m hopeful that it is because the Eastside has many destinations besides just jobs. But I’m however expecting Federal Way extension to be more like Lynnwood extension, with a few crowded peak trains in one direction but disappointing daily boardings. At least Federal Way extension has Highline CC as well as is far enough from SeaTac to attract some SeaTac flyers to the stations, which should create reasons to use the new stations beyond peak commuting hours. (Note SeaTac boardings almost doubled — the highest percentage increase of any 1 Line station opened before 2022 — when even Lynnwood Link opened).

        Not showing peak and daily crowding trends is actually a glaring omission in ST’s System Performance Tracker. I’m not sure what metric is best to show — but a crowding metric is needed.

      16. “Disappointing” off-peak ridership is still above zero. So people are still using Link for non-work trips and for shift work. It’s the responsibility of the station areas and cities to have compelling destinations so that there’s all-day bidirectional travel and passengers come and spend money in those areas.

        In some cases we have to wait for it to be built out, as in Lynnwood and Shoreline. In others there’s a structural reason (Stadium only has events on certain days, Surrey Downs refuses to upzone).

      17. @ Mike:

        “Disappointing” off-peak ridership is still above zero. “

        That could be said of any transit investment, Mike.

        Light rail is expensive to build and maintain. It should have an expectation of being much more than just a commuter service. Otherwise, we could have built a bunch of Sounder single track lines and called it a day. The “spine” already exists between Sounder and ST Express.

        ST is increasingly looking more closely at station areas. Here are the two parts of that effort for Tacoma Dome Link:

        https://www.soundtransit.org/sites/default/files/documents/TDLE-station-planning-report-fw-part1.pdf

        https://www.soundtransit.org/sites/default/files/documents/TDLE-station-planning-report-tc-part2.pdf

        The three middle stations before Tacoma Done have pretty low 2042 forecast boardings at 1800 for South Federal Way, 2600 for Fife and 1200 for Portland Ave. Tacoma Dome at 10800 is almost double these other three COMBINED.

        The reports hint at better TOD and connectivity. However as you point out, it’s up to the cities to make it happen.

        Of these, South Federal Way could be so much more. 352nd and 99 to St Francis Hospital could be connected as an urban pedestrian corridor — across the South Federal Way park and ride lot. (That existing park and ride would have been an amazing station site but that ship has sailed). Even with the current station sites, a village with St Francis Hospital at one end and the station at the other could be a cool village (with the current park and ride lot reused).

        Outer TODs with daylong activity are generally pure gravy for fare revenue for ST. Trains are be often empty in the off peak direction or at off peak hours.

        The challenge is probably more in getting cities, ST and the market to all work together for a new destination that gets riders all day. For 2 TDLE stations, it’s also the tribes as the major driver. It’s one thing to draw pretty diagrams and color coded maps. It’s another to make it actually happen. (Parking at Emerald Queen can be tight even with their large garages. I’m not sure of the best way to connect high-activity casinos to light rail because of the possibility of casino parking spaces used by Link riders. The casinos have money to do cool things though.)

      18. “It’s the responsibility of the station areas and cities to have compelling destinations so that there’s all-day bidirectional travel and passengers come and spend money in those areas.”

        I would flip that around and say it’s the responsibility of Sound Transit to build stations in areas where there is good, all-day, bidirectional ridership. It’s not a surrounding neighborhood’s fault a poorly placed station has low ridership. If a station is placed in the middle of a giant cow pasture, the cow pasture’s zoning isn’t to blame for the station’s low ridership.

      19. «My question is, “Is it pure folly to build publicly financed transit in a town where normal people can’t afford to live?” »

        That’s the whole reason why people must spend hours per day commuting: with essentially a hard cap on housing, everyone that can’t afford to live nearby needs to get around simehow.

    4. Two counters for your friend.

      1. Link is needed over buses when transit is serving a dense node. Your friend’s error is not considering Bellevue CBD, Overlake, or Redmond Downtown as dense, but to Al’s point the density there is great. Yes, a buses can cross the lake effectively, but then the bus struggles to get in & out of urban street grids. This is why the Seattle bus tunnel was so effective. If your friend wants to argue that East Link should have been a 100% grade separated bus line, fine, but aside from the Lake W crossing it’s the same capital investment … but then the 550 was crush loaded at peak hours pre-COVID. East Link is Link not Bus because the demand will exceed what a high frequency bus line could handle – see LA’s Orange line or Vancouver’s 99 for a highly successful bus line that needs an upgrade to rail. The region could abruptly stop growing and East Link is still necessary to handle ridership volume. (Much of ST3, OTOH, does need robust population growth to justify Link extensions)

      2. The comment on TOD, housing supply, and desirability of yards, tell your friend to focus on price per square foot, not price per home, when evaluating how the market reacts to densification.

  9. I rode Link today SB during the AM peak at about 8:30.

    Boarded car #4, partly because I arrived on the platform exactly as the train was arriving, and partly because car #4 was the only car that had any amount of room available at all.

    Link was absolutely packed. Even car #4. There were a few homeless people taking up extra seats, but it was mainly SRO. Outside of special events, I don’t think I have ever seen Link that full.

    ST really needs to get Full ELE open, and open soon. Either that, or they need to start running a scheduled overlay in the urban core. Because demand is just too high for capacity.

    And Revive I-5 hasn’t even started yet. It’s going to get insane once that starts.

    1. I think the big issue now is ELE safety testing will take almost 6 months after completion (lots of the tunnel shutdowns this coming month are to connect the catenary wire at Chinatown). IIRC this is due to the special floating bridge and an abundance of caution given previous issues with the concrete sleepers. This gives us a starting date of August at the absolute earliest but probably December if we’re being honest.

      As for what can happen now, the scheduling has a few infill trains for the peak periods to try and compensate for the mediocre headway right now, but those are usually 3 car trains and they only have 3 or 4 of those to add to the line. I think that a solution of more frequent trains in the downtown core that only move between Northgate and Chinatown or SODO would be ideal because a lot of the traffic from those stations comes from bus transfers. They could call it the core shuttle or something. Not sure how feasible that is to implement though.

      1. @DM.

        Six months of testing is the standard length for testing of a new extension. It breaks down to roughly 2 months for verification (fit and function) testing, followed by roughly 4 months of simulated service. Full ELE shouldn’t be much different.

        That said, ST announced last April that DRLE was entering fit and function testing, and they haven’t yet announced the start of simulated service. So that puts DRLE at roughly a year of testing, which is pretty darn slow. But I guess LLE and Full ELE are higher priorities. Oh well, Redmond can just wait.

        ST previously said that we should see dead tow testing on Full ELE in Q1 of this year, and live wire testing in Q2. So that is something to watch for.

        Current headways on the 1-Line are 8-mins at peak, which I would definitely call better than mediocre. When the Full ELE opens that will improve to 4-mins at peak, but it won’t make much difference to me. I always seem to arrive at the platform just in time to jump through the closing doors.

        In the interim an overlay IDS to NGS would be nice, and 2 car trains would be more than sufficient per demand, but I don’t think ST M&O staff has the bandwidth to handle there (3!) major openings and an overlay all simultaneously.

        One thing ST could do in the interim would be to go to 7.5-min headways on the 1-Line until Full ELE opens. In addition to being a cyclic schedule (clock facing), such a change would add 6.7% to capacity, and wouldn’t require any major changes on the O&M side. ST might need to shrink their gap and spare ratios a bit to free up the LRV’s, but that should be doable.

        But it’s going to be an exciting year. Can’t wait.

      2. Lazarus, or anyone, in your opinion, do you think internally, Sound Transit is reasonably certain which month the full Line 2 will mostly likely be ready to open? Or, do you think they still have no idea, and can currently only identify the season it will probably be ready to open?

        And I’m not talking about what they have stated publicly. I’m talking about inside the agency. Do you think they now know the approximate month it will be ready to open?

      3. @Sam,

        “do you think internally, Sound Transit is reasonably certain which month the full Line 2 will mostly likely be ready to open? ”

        Ya, I think they have a very good idea of when RDLE will open. They know, they are just waiting to make a public announcement.

        I’m hoping to hear something soon, but I’m sure it won’t be public info. I think the holidays have messed with my information stream. Everyone’s schedules are off. Errr.

      4. “… When the Full ELE opens that will improve to 4-mins at peak, …”

        The service through North Seattle should be at 4 minutes peak earlier than that. It should begin no later than when full 2 Line simulation begins — like 2 mos the before the full ELE opens. That’s similar to how LA Metro is currently running the K Line today (simulation around LAX but open to riders both north and south of the testing segment).

        ST could run more frequent trains earlier than that once the power is live on the 2 Line across Lake Washington. It appears that the overcrowding is restricted to an hour or two each in the morning or afternoon. ST can start running extra trains — even unofficially — any time they see the need after that.

        Anyway, all these service possibilities depend on testing schedules —and hopefully ST finds no problems that create delays. We all will be watching to see how the ST timeline works on these next four openings (Downtown Redmond, Lake Washington crossing, Federal Way and Pinehurst/130th). But the connection to the East OMF should occur this calendar year — and may even be possible by the end of summer. Then it’s a matter of how nimble ST operations is to responding to the new opportunity to each the second OMF. .

  10. Since Fare enforcement and payment seems to be a pretty big topic on here, I wish that ORCA had fare capping like in Portland. Currently, pay-as-you-go riders end up paying far more than if they load day passes, which is inconvenient. For people who ride link more than twice a day, with the $6 day pass you’re losing money paying for 3 or more trips on any mode of transit. It’s insane that we don’t have that if one of the goals for the orca card is to save passengers money.

    I know I’m preaching to the choir on this one but it is frustrating if you forget to load a day pass or don’t have time and just eat the $3 cost off of the account. If you ride transit frequently it makes sense to buy the pass, but only if you are predictable in your pattern. If your travel patterns vary unpredictably month to month and you don’t have enough money to just buy a monthly pass all the time, then you’re kind of screwed sometimes.

  11. Live wire testing is underway on FWLE! I haven’t see it with my own eyes, but:

    https://www.instagram.com/soundtransit/reel/DEid2F-TH9Z/

    Seems sort of odd that they are doing this now, but maybe DRLE is past this phase and Full ELE isn’t quite ready yet for it yet. Might as well keep the staff busy I guess.

    With three (3!) major Link extensions opening in less than 2 years, it gets sort of hard to keep track of what’s going on where. But it’s definitely exciting.

    2. I didn’t read the details. But, normally, when something transit-related makes it into a board game, it’s trains (e.g. ticket to ride). Never a lowly bus. So, the title stuck out at me, as a game written by someone who doesn’t have the rail bias the rest of the world has.

  13. March 31st? That is too long to wait for enforcement. Start it RIGHT NOW! COUNTY WIDE! Not just in the Seattle routes. Cite them, fine them, and if they do not pay, jail them. I am tired of King County Metro’s criminal loving and supporting policies.

    1. I mean it takes time to hire and train people if they stopped fare enforcement for multiple years at this point. This isn’t something you can immediately start back up.

      1. This should have been in place the moment fares were collected again. Get real cops to do this.

      2. Yes! Pull detectives off homicide, narcotics, burglaries, and sexual assaults! We needs those fares!!!

        WTF.

      3. I have suggested that we have a full time police force on all transit. A new police force. Dedicated to transit crimes. Crime is crime

      5. Cam, they do not do anything. They are told not to do anything because our county loves the criminals.

Comments are closed.