In this Sunday Movie installment, Adam (aka AdamDoesNotExist) travels from San Francisco to Seattle using only local transit. No Greyhound, Amtrak, plane, or car. A three-day journey in three parts.
Part 1: From San Francisco via the Pacific coast corridor to the California-Oregon border.
Part 2: North along the southern Oregon coast, then east to Eugene.
Part 3: Eugene to Seattle.
Meanwhile, Climate and Transit does their own trip from Portland to Seattle on local transit.
This is an open thread.
Great choice for the Sunday Movie installment, Mike. The AdamDoesNotExist 3-part series came up on my YouTube algorithm recently, and I watched all 3 parts with great intrigue. It was nice to see the familiar transit agencies in the Bay Area, Portland and Seattle. But what was most fascinating to me were the rural transit agencies connecting the sparsely populated coastal areas. I’ve always wondered what it’s like for someone who lives car free in those places. They have more connectivity than I would have thought!
I’ve gone to California on surface transit several times, but not that way. In 1987 I did my first solo trip, on Amtrak to San Diego to visit relatives, with a stopover in San Francisco on the way down, and in Vancouver WA on the way back to visit two other friends.
From 1997 to 2007 I did a lot of traveling on Greyhound along the West Coast and some to the East Coast, because it was cheaper than Amtrak. From 1999-2001 I went to Vancouver BC monthly to visit friends, initially on Amtrak Cascades, but later on Greyhound because I could go Friday after work, go to clubs or hang out Friday and Saturday evenings, and then come back Sunday morning, which I couldn’t do with Cascades’s schedule.
In 2007 I switched to Amtrak because I decided roominess and comfort and seeing the older areas where the rail goes was more important than bargain-basement prices. In 2001 I stopped traveling. My last trip was Greyhound to Spokane.
During my Greyhound years I usually went to San Francisco on the I-5 express runs (once a day). But in 1998 or 99 I took the coast route. Greyhound had a route from Portland to Astoria down the coast, then through Marin, across the Marin-San Rafael Bridge to Oakland. It was deleted over a decade ago, part of Greyhoound’s contractions.
So it was the same corridor Adam was on in 2025, but on the coast between Eugene and Astoria. I think it took 29 hours, compared to 17-20 in the I-5 corridor. (Amtrak takes 24 hours.) The Oregon Coast was overcast in February. It felt like there was sprawl and tourist traps at every possible location, so I didn’t like it much. But I haven’t see it in sunny summer. (I did go to Cannon Beach earlier in junior high in summer; we drove with a family who had a cabin there.)
So it’s interesting to me to see what the corridor is like now, and Adam’s clips of the town centers I didn’t see, and the beautiful redwood forests I was too left-brained to notice or appreciate. And the transit services he used, and his experiences with them. And the Smart train in Marin, which I’d heard about but never seen. And how the transfer from the Larkspur ferry to the Smart train was so far; I thought it would be next to it. How do daily commuters tolerate that transfer walk? What’s their total travel time with it?
I’ve thought about someday going to/through California on regional trains. Cascades goes to Eugene. Then there’s a gap between Eugene and Sacrament where I think you’d have to take the Coast Starlight or Greyhound. Then there’s the Capitol Corridor from Sacramento to Gilroy south of San Jose. Then probably something to Monterey, something else to the Central Valley, and something else to Los Angeles. Or maybe Ace to Stockton could be useful there, although it was PM peak only when I was there. I’ve heard contradictory things about whether there’s a complete chain of regional trains from Los Angeles to San Diego but you have to wait an hour somewhere in the middle, or if there’s a gap in the middle and you have to take a bus through it.
I’m wondering what local bus options exist between Eugene and Sacramento. If the coast has them, the higher-volume I-5 must have them. Or maybe there aren’t any, so Adam had to go via the coast. Bit there must be. If Washington state has multi-county local buses now and the northern Oregon coast does, then northern California must have them too, and there must be something across the lightly-populated Siskiyou Pass across the California-Oregon border.
There’s no local bus service south of Eugene, unless you use the paratransit service that goes to Cottage Grove.
Even by long distance bus, your only option to get to, say, Medford, is either Coast Starlight to Klamath Falls and coast connector to Medford over the Siskiyous, or if you want by bus the whole way: Eugene-Bend – Klamath Falls, then switch to the same bus as the Amtrak connector to Medford.
Other than that, you have to take the coastal bus routes, and do something like Eugene – Florence or Albany – Newport.
So Medford is really isolated in the transit network. How many hours of overhead does going indirectly to it add? A friend in college came from Medford, and it’s the largest city in southern Oregon. And it’s near Ashland, where I attended to the Shakespeare festival for three years in junior high. So it sucks that it doesn’t have direct north-south transit.
On the map it looks like coming from Seattle, going to Eugene and then Bend would be backtracking. Can you go south to Salem or Albany and get a more direct bus to Bend?
There is currently a Pacific Crest Bus Lines route that runs Portland – Salem – Bend.
Someone might be operating on I-5 south of Eugene, but I’m not finding it yet. Even Frontieras del Norte, which specifically mentions travel on I-5, doesn’t offer Medford or Grants Pass on their web site,
There’s a complete chain of regional trains from LA to San Diego. Oceanside, where they connect, has a nice town center too.
The furthest south you can get by regional train from Sacramento is the San Joaquin to Bakersfield, without going through the Bay Area at all. But, you’ll need to take a bus between there and either Lancaster or Santa Clarita to pick up the Metrolink to LA.
“I’ve always wondered what it’s like for someone who lives car free in those places. They have more connectivity than I would have thought!”
The connectivity has also increased, at least in Washington and I assume elsewhere. There’s more awareness of the needs of elderly people, those without cars, and those who don’t want to drive. Washington has the Dungeness, Grape, Apple, and Gold Lines between rural towns. There’s a chain of buses from Mt Vernon through Whidbey Island to the Mukilteo ferro. There’s a Seattle-Bellingham chain (Skagit Transit Everett-Mt Vernon, Whatcom Transit Mt Vernon-Bellingham). There’s a chain from Lakewood to Olympia, Aberdeen, and I think Astoria. Both the Mt Vernon and Olympia corridors go up and down in terms of how much off-peak or weekend service they have. Sometimes it’s hourly, sometimes weekday-only. And more that I’ve probably forgotten. Many of them didn’t exist when I was traveling.
So the same has probably happened on Oregon and California. More rural service, more ridership, better coordinated rural transfers.
I think living without a car is a lot easier in a town than in an area that’s completely rural. A town at least means that you can do your routine shopping on foot, so you only need the bus for less frequent trips to another town, or to the nearest big city.
I don’t think most rural routes run often enough to be usable for shopping trips. It may get you there all right, but not without a wait of several hours to get back.
Parts of Oregon are better, while others are worse. Greyhound/Flix removed all I-5 service south of Eugene a few years ago.
While crossing the Cascades in winter by bus is bad, I-5 through the Siskiyous is apparently so much worse they stoped doing it. So, the California route is now Eugene – Bend – Klamath Falls – Sacramento.
I lived five years in Ilwaco/Long Beach for five years, two of those without a car. It is do-able as much of my daily commuting was easy enough on foot as small towns can be fairly condensed. Far easier to walk to THE grocery store than it is to walk to one in Portland for example., My longer distance travel was as infrequent as the buses, but through connections and overnights with family, I traveled seamlessly to Tacoma, Aberdeen, Portland, Tillamook….
Unfortunately, the gig was up as soon as Covid struck. Pacific Transit cut services so bad I was forced to buy a car or be isolated. (Furthering my conspiratorial belief that no disaster is bad for car/oil companies)
They have since returned and expanded. I made a visit recently (from Los Angeles) using almost all public transit up the coast (one hitchhike due to a botched connection. I followed much of this youtubers route in fact, but continued north, home to Ilwaco on the coast.
Can someone briefly explain, after Pinehurst Station is open, which bus routes will connect to … Shoreline South Station, Pinehurst Station, and Northgate Station … from the east, or from the Lake City side of the stations?
Here’s what I found after a search … Route 65, 72, 522, and eventually Stride S3 to Shoreline South. Route 77 to Pinehurst. And routes 61, 75, and 322 to Northgate. I’m sure this isn’t 100% correct.
The Lynnwood Link restructure has three phases. The second and third phases will happen when Pinehurst Station and the full 2 Line open. We have an article on it somewhere. There won’t be many changes from current; mainly the 77 and 522.
There are two big changes from ST:
1) East Link is complete. Once this happens ST will send the 522 to South Shoreline Station.
2) Pinehurst Station is open.
This is the plan after those two things happen. There are three bus changes:
522 — As mentioned it will go to 148th Station.
72 — Replaces 372 and is sent to 148th Station.
77 — Runs from Bitter Lake to U-District via Pinehurst Station while skirting Lake City.
It was never clear if this was going to be two steps or one. I was always envisioning this as two phases. First East Link is complete. At this point the 72 and 522 would change but the 77 would simply run from the U-District to the Lake City Fred Meyer. But with the gap between these two events shrinking it is quite possible that Metro will make all of these changes at the same time.
The buses serving each station north of Northgate are listed on the map. The buses serving Northgate aren’t supposed to change and are listed here.
None of this is written in stone. As the date nears I expect to campaign against these changes for the reasons I mentioned earlier. I am still waiting to gather ridership data from Metro (I was planning on using that as part of the argument against this change). Hopefully that will happen soon.
I said two phases because different parts depend on different external events. It wasn’t definite when the full 2 Line and Pinehurst station would open, or which would be first. Cross-lake service was going to open before Lynnwood, but then the plinths had to be rebuilt and Lynnwood ended up being first. It’s possible the full 2 Line and Pinehurst could open at the same time, and then phases 2 and 3 would be simultaneous. But it’s better now to assume they’ll be separate until we know for sure.
“None of this is written in stone. As the date nears I expect to campaign against these changes for the reasons I mentioned earlier.”
The county council has already approved the final route changes. The only uncertainty is the implementation dates, which depend on when certain Sound Transit events occur. We both mentioned route 522, but we forgot that that’s Sound Transit’s decision when to change it: it’s outside Metro’s control.
I don’t see Metro going to the county council to ask for an amendment to the restructure. Metro can make small changes without asking the county council for permission, but the changes can only be so extensive. Moving two miles of stops to a different street going a different direction is probably above the threshold. And first you have to convince Metro that it’s worth doing. By all means tell Metro to do it and write articles advocating for it, but I wouldn’t hold my breath expecting it to happen. You could set a petition so that Metro and the elected reps would be impressed by the number of signatures. There will be another opportunity for change when the Stride 3 restructure comes around.
The Sound Transit board is amending the 2025 service plan to extend the 2 Line to Lynnwood at the upcoming 6/5 board meeting. Could this mean that we might see a late December opening?
Notably it does not amend the service plan to include the STX bus restructure – it says that’ll occur as part of the 2026 Service Plan.
If testing is on track I could see them the 2 Line across I-90 in late December and staggering the bus restructure by a few weeks into January 2026 like they did with the Lynnwood Link opening.
https://www.soundtransit.org/st_sharepoint/download/sites/PRDA/ActiveDocuments/Resolution%20R2025-12.pdf
Once the simulation begins, both 1 Line and 2 Line service should be running between Lynnwood and Downtown. That’s scheduled for this fall even with a January 2026 Lake Washington crossing opening. Trains every 4-5 minutes until past 10 PM!
So there’s no need to wait until the Lake Washington opening day to implement Lynnwood-related changes.
It’s the timing of the Pinehurst Station that is more impactful. Even then, it’s just mainly affecting the new Route 77. Metro could make a minor adjustment (like extending the north end to Shoreline South) to even provide service close to what a post-Pinehurst service would be.
Finally, the Metro final restructure map sends Route 522 to Shoreline South before Stride 3 opens. Unless there’s some disruptive construction on 145th, the could happen once simulation testing begins later this year (presumably).
It’s the timing of the Pinehurst Station that is more impactful. Even then, it’s just mainly affecting the new Route 77. Metro could make a minor adjustment (like extending the north end to Shoreline South).
As I wrote up above it would be simpler (and cheaper) to just end at Lake City Way Fred Meyer. The change to the 72 could happen at the same time. There would be less churn that way. Those are the two changes going into place to deal with the loss of the 522 on Lake City Way.
Dow said just a week ago that the full 2 Line won’t meet its December opening goal. The new target is “Winter 2026”. The May 28 article has links to an Urbanist and a Seattle Times article on it. A commentator somewhere posted a specific date in January I think. If that’s accurate about ST’s intention, it’s still not a commitment or guarantee to that date. ST says it will be more certain on a date after a self-powered run test this summer.
ST also announced that all ST Express restructures for East Link, Federal Way Link, and otherwise will be folded into a 2026 operating plan. Its first proposal is supposed to come out around now. STB got the first outreach flyers on that May 31, but the map doesn’t have anything more than the current routes, so we’re still waiting for the first restructure proposal. The process will go through two or three rounds of proposals and feedback stretching to later this year.
ST might postpone any ST Express restructure until after the World Cup. Its World Cup plans are extra Sounder runs, and extra service on the 545 and 550 as needed. ST may not want to delete the 545 and 550 until after the games even with the full 2 Line just in case the Line breaks down or gets overcrowded. The current routes are proven, locals know what to expect, and they can tell visitors what’s available.
There are two possible reasons it says 2025 instead of 2026. One, fiscal years aren’t always January 1 to December 31. Two, even though it appears to be worded for an actual opening in 2025, it may just be ramping up for testing and preparation. I can’t see Dow announcing it won’t make December, then a week later submitting a resolution for a December opening. It must be just to create the possibility of December in case things go better than expected, or the resolution was written before the bad news came, or the resolution is really to authorize testing and preparation even if the opening is in 2026.
@Mike Orr,
“The new target is ‘Winter 2026’……..A commentator somewhere posted a specific date in January I think.”
LOL. Apparently the current “goal” is February. Unpublished of course. No word on whether or not that is a “stretch goal” or not, but it is depressing just the same. And it is still just a “goal”.
And I’m still a bit confused by ST’s phasing. If they are successful in getting Full ELE testing started in July, then the standard 6 month testing timeline would put the opening in Dec 2025/Jan 2026. And that ignores the comments Sparrman was making about being able to reduce simulated service to only 2 months in duration. So why we are now looking at 8+ months is beyond me.
And it looks like the previous Full ELE dead tow “test” was just for show and not a real test after all. Turns out it was on the westbound track, and that track didn’t have all the trackside goodies installed yet. It’s sort of hard to demonstrate adequate clearance when the things you are supposed to show clearance from don’t exist yet.
I’m betting that dead tow test was”test” will need to be repeated. Or at least consolidated into something else. More wasted time.
But hey, this is the Balducci/Dow Show now. If they want to stop work for a few days to perform a little performance art for the press, then who cares about a couple of more days of schedule slide?
Late is late.
In past Link extensions, ST ran a full schedule of test trains end to end for the last couple months before opening, and allowed passengers to ride them in the existing segment but kicked them off at the last station before the unopened segment. So ST could run Lynnwood-Redmond and kick people off at CID and South Bellevue, but we don’t know for certain if it will or not. Somebody brought up that this is the first time the last station is a downtown station with a live train alternating every 4-5 minutes. ST may worry that security-sweeping the test train at CID may delay the live train to Angle Lake.
ST may worry that security-sweeping the test train at CID may delay the live train to Angle Lake.
You are bound to have more confused people than you did with the Northgate Link and Lynnwood Link extensions. On the other hand, ST has been obsessed with crowding since Lynnwood Link opened. It seems silly not to take advantage of the extra trains even if the other train is delayed a little bit. That doesn’t seem likely given the trains will still be four minutes apart at worst.
I interpret the ST motion is to allow the simulated trains as in-service trains between Lynnwood and Downtown. Riders will be ejected at ID. Then can board again in South Bellevue.
Emptying a train is no big deal in most cases. Most riders obey an announcement that a train will be out of service and leave of their own volition. Most stragglers will also quickly leave. I doubt many will even board a train at Westlake if they are told that CID is the last stop while waiting on the platform.
There should be 4-5 minutes before the 1 Line arrives. That’s ample time to clear most trains.
The bigger concern should be reversing trains at Lynnwood. The reversal break will be halved.
There will be a horde of new drivers required to operate the 2 Line. I could see ST wanting to engage a cross-lake bus bridge service instead of keep running existing routes across the Lake. Surely many of the new train drivers are today’s bus drivers.
Sweeping at CID might be more problematic than sweeping a Redmond Tech or Northgate before DRLE or LLE opened. Southbound riders are conditioned to think every train continues on in service south from CID. But, riders were never conditioned to believe that every pre-DRLE or LLE train continued on in service. ST may want to avoid the potential confusing and conflict by not letting riders board trains that are continuing to Redmond.
ST should be concerned about crowding, so that nobody is left behind due to a full train.
Today I was at Westlake southbound, with a dozen people with suitcases. Two of them were looking at the Angle Lake and Lynnwood displays and wondering if they were going the right direction. I said, “If you’re going to the airport, this is the right direction.” When they and somebody around them mentioned Lynnwood again I said, “Lynnwood is fifteen miles north of Seattle.” They said they definitely didn’t want that. I elaborated, “The airport is the second-last station before Angle Lake.” That reassured them the most.
When the train came it was pretty full. They were concerned and I said, “It’s busy because two ballgames are about to start. But a lot of people will probably get off here.” I overstated that last part and felt bad about it, but more people than usual did get off.
A surprising thing happened then. Usually people gather around the doors, giving exitees just enough room to get off. But this time almost all the people stood even further back. I went up close to the door because I didn’t want the door to close before I could get on. I felt bad for walking in front of everyone standing back, as if I were cutting the line. But it’s their fault for not stepping up. The last person got out and I went in. Only a couple other people did. But the people with suitcases standing back didn’t; they just let the train pass by thinking it was too full. But there was room for them and their suitcases in the middle of the sideways-seats aisle, in the upper sections, and in a couple other standing spots. They just couldn’t see it, and they didn’t have enough experience with the train to know that those spaces might be there. By the time I realized they weren’t boarding as usual, it was too late to shout out to say there’s room before the doors closed, so they ended up skipping the train.
I hoped the next train and the one after weren’t as full, as often happens on game days. I was getting off at CID for one of my Uwajimaya trips; I didn’t think to tell the visitors that it would only be full for a few stops and then half the train would get off. Next time.
The upshot is, people pass up trains even when they’re not completely full. They either want their personal space, or they don’t know enough about Link to know there’s more space than it may appear from the outside. If there were twice as many trains with the full 2 Line, then the trains would be half as full, and those visitors wouldn’t have skipped the train.
I said half as full, but they really wouldn’t be that empty, because I believe higher frequency generates ridership. Everybody has a different threshold at which they’ll stop taking transit or forego the trip. Every minute of waiting or potential waiting deters a number of people. The same with speed, destinations, coverage, safety, cost, crowding, etc. But waiting is the biggest factor: people hate waiting more than they hate the same amount of time riding. So if you double frequency, ridership will more than double. If not immediately, within a couple years. because it takes people time one by one to learn about the new service, realize how it could benefit their new trip, and move to a different home so they can advantage of that service regularly.
“Southbound riders are conditioned to think every train continues on in service south from CID”
If the displays say “Chinatown/Intl Dist”, that may prepare them better to expect it. Some may not board a CID train if they’re going further south.
@Mike you’re more charitable than I am. It’s common on both trains and buses for people to stand by the doors rather than move all the way to the back/middle. Those people are selfish and prevent other riders from being able to even get on the train/bus and they should be shamed. But it’s also part of the passive-aggressive nature of Seattle that almost nobody will actually tell these people to move all the way in.
Before 2020, TriMet would have crew on the platform at Rose Quarter directing people after big events.
“You there! There’s lots more space. You need to move further in. There’s 10 empty feet over here. Move over that way.” etc.
To be clear, even if ST chose to not allow riders further than CID southbound, there is no similar reason to prevent 2 Line boarding northbound starting at CID headed towards Lynnwood.
The reverse direction is South Belkevue for a train sweep. Given that it only has 680 average weekday riders today, unloading a train and about 80 trains today, that’s less than 9 riders a train deboarding. I’m even if a particular train is triple that (say 27 riders) weeping a loiter would never ever seem to take 4 minutes unless they were very unusually belligerent.
To be clear, even if ST chose to not allow riders further than CID southbound, there is no similar reason to prevent 2 Line boarding northbound starting at CID headed towards Lynnwood.
Good point. There would be no confusion going that way. Riders don’t have to know where they are on a Line 1 or Line 2 train — they are just going north from CID. This is also where you have the most crowding. Evening rush hour is worse than morning rush hour because people are just out and about more (e. g. folks are attending events at the UW or Capitol Hill). If nothing else they should allow riders to ride either train going north.
Getting on and off trains, elevators and buses are all very similar. People get off the vehicle before you get on. If you are on the vehicle you should not stand next to the doors unless you are getting off at that stop. Similarly on a crowded vehicle you want to make your wait to the front before your stop. When getting on the vehicle you want to stand to the side of the doors but close to them. You should allow people to leave before boarding.
Next I’ll describe how to hammer a nail into a piece of wood. First you hold the nail onto the wood and gently tap it …
Seriously though, this is all very basic stuff but it is amazing how many people just don’t get it. People stand next to the doors inside a train through multiple stops. People stand right in front of the doors at the platform and seem surprised that someone would be getting off the train. To be fair it isn’t completely obvious where the doors open on the platform although ST has done a better job of marking that lately. It still isn’t as good as some cities but it is not that hard to figure out. The trains could be better but ST seems disinterested in that. Like so much in our system we just muddle along.
It wasn’t packed at the doors; there was visibly room for at least two people and suitcases in the “foyer” area behind the doors. Anybody who had been crowding there already had to move to let the stream of people off. If they’d come inside they would have seen even more choices in the sideways-seats aisle.
I’ll keep it in mind if I see people standing back assuming the train is full when it isn’t.
We don’t need to second-guess why people are standing in the foyer. I stand there sometimes if I’m getting off at the next stop or a few stops, or because any other spot wouldn’t have access to a grab bar so I’d worry about falling when the train accelerates, if my leg is sore and it would hurt too much going up and down the stairs to the upper level and it would also be hard to sit down and stand up and I’d bother the neighbors doing that — it’s not worth it for just a couple stops. I have a heavy backpack or shopping bags exacerbating all of these. Some people stand in the foyer because they’re lazy inconsiderate bastards, but there are also other reasons.
It’s not the worst idea. Southbound riders boarding between Lynnwood and CID will need to be trained to pay attention to what train they’re getting on. Might as well start that training early.
By sweeping 2 Line trains at CID, people on the “wrong” train will has less of a “penalty” for their mistake than they will once Judkins Park is open. E.g. Having to wait at the same platform for the next train vs. having to backtrack and then transfer.
Welcome to being a “real” rail system with intersecting and inter-lined services!
Thank you for saying that, Max!
I think all of almost all Seattle transit riders are smart enough to instantly learn how a system with two light rail lines works. Some other people worry that so many will be confused or misunderstand that it will delay a train over four minutes. I think that very few will. A simple audio announcement (“This train will be going out of service at the next stop”) on top of clear destination signage is plenty to motivate riders quickly off the train.
And the southbound trains branch after CID! The only possible place that could be delayed is at that one station platform. It’s not like what happens on a crowded train where there are delays at each subsequent platform. Trains should leave Lynnwood evenly spaced and mostly arrive at CID evenly spaced.
ST could (and may prefer to do so) to operate the 2 Line trains to follow 1 Line trains 2-3 minutes later. I think there has been chat about having just three-car 2 Line trains anyway. In that scenario, the 2 Line train would be more of the “clean up” train and be carrying fewer riders since that’s not much time for new riders to get to the platform — and could always have five minutes before the next 1 Line trains arrive.
I will finally note that the DSTT had many different lines since its opening in 1990 until 2019 — and almost all riders had no confusion by boarding a bus that went out of service at the end of the DSTT. I don’t think that the riding public has gotten radically dumber in the past six years.
As I wrote up above you are likely to have more confusion than previous truncations. But it is the same process. You tell everyone to get off and then you sweep the train. After that the train keeps going (to the East Side). It is highly unlikely that doing so would delay the other train.
It also quite likely that because of the unusual nature of this extension this becomes well publicized. I would not be surprised if the Seattle Times runs a front page article with graphics about how riders of those trains won’t be able to travel south (or east) of CID. It is a fairly simple idea and people will get the hang of it very quickly.
@ Al S.
I’m sure 95% of riders will get it on the first or second try (seems like the type of mistake you only make once). It’s the last 5% of people mindlessly following their commute routine, infrequent riders, tourists, etc. that might need the extra training.
While ST is at it, Redmond-bound 2 Line trains arriving at CID should play an announcement to the effect of “Change trains at this platform for the 1 Line to SeaTac Airport and Federal Way” and southbound 1 Line Trains should say “Change trains at this platform for the 2 Line to Bellevue and Redmond.” An example is what TransLink does on the Expo Line where it branches at Columbia: https://youtu.be/y2XIBIZk6cE?si=mKTqKGdgatzvyRPj&t=240
@ Max:
Yes those transfer announcements will also be important and can really help. If any rider after that can be confused, it’s because of bad signage and announcements or a handful of inattentive riders. Most confusion can be easily remedied.
Again, the train displays should say:
Angle Lake 4 min
Chinatown/ID 8 min
Angle Lake 12 min
Chinatown/ID 16 min
And maybe even “Angle Lake/airport” to dispel the confusion my Saturday platform neighbors had.
Trains from Redmond can say “South Bellevue” like they do now.
https://www.theurbanist.org/2025/06/02/sound-transit-ceo-tabs-agency-wide-realignment/
This is the jargon-filled word-salad you get when you hire a politician for CEO. Say “innovative” again, Dow.
Actually, just explain the “tools” you are talking about that will magically make ends-meet. Holistic. Creative. Iterative. Jesus.
I agree. The photo of ST board members brainstorming ideas related to system expansion seemed especially worrying. Those board members are not trained to do this work – their job should just be to make decisions balancing the needs of their constituents and the advice of professional planners and lower level ST staff, not do the planning themselves. A top-down plan for saving money will continue the same performative measures like we’ve seen before.
The photo was of a map of the entire region. That seems to be the appropriate level a Board discussion?
Yes, a regional map makes sense as the centerpiece of a board-level discussion. But the caption specifically mentions brainstorming. I don’t think it should be the board’s job to come up with new ideas. They should be hiring experts for that, and they actually probably already have many experts hired for that. The board’s job is to take those ideas and decide whether not they align with their constituents’ needs, not brainstorm new ideas.
I don’t think it should be the board’s job to come up with new ideas. They should be hiring experts for that, and they actually probably already have many experts hired for that.
My guess is the staff (that are experts) are paid to implement what the board wants. In other words the board says “We want a train to West Seattle” and the expert says “Sure, where you would like the stations?”
Later they come back and tell the board what the rough costs for building the stations where they asked. Even later they give you the detailed cost estimates. The experts won’t say “Are you sure you want a train there? We could probably have really good bus service if we just did the following…”.
I agree that it makes sense to hire outside staff to do that sort of thing. But it is quite possible that the “brainstorming” involves fairly minimal changes that are largely political. For example getting rid of the parking garages and replacing them with feeder service. You don’t really need an expert to come up with that idea.
What is most disappointing is that no one announced this sort of brainstorming before the event. The point of a republic is to gather information from the governed and act on it. I’m sure the folks on the blog could come up with a long list of ideas that we feel the board should consider. Everything from having open gangways on Sounder trains (so that we can run longer trains without expanding the stations) to replacing West Seattle Link with better bus service. As with any representative the board is free to ignore the ideas from the public but in this case the public wasn’t given a chance to even present those ideas.
“What is most disappointing is that no one announced this sort of brainstorming before the event. The point of a republic is to gather information from the governed and act on it. I’m sure the folks on the blog could come up with a long list of ideas that we feel the board should consider. Everything from having open gangways on Sounder trains (so that we can run longer trains without expanding the stations) to replacing West Seattle Link with better bus service. As with any representative the board is free to ignore the ideas from the public but in this case the public wasn’t given a chance to even present those ideas.”
I agree with your point, Ross. I actually think this is the overarching institutional problem with ST. They feign public input but don’t give a crap about actually listening.
There have been many small and large suggestions not only mentioned on this blog, but also at ST open houses by dozens of people independently. Not only does ST summarily ignore them, the summary comments are either not even published or when they are they’re so watered down that the suggestions aren’t identifiable. For example, suggestions about not having a far vertical and horizontal distance to merely transfer is watered down to something like “concern about making transit transfers”. The concept of “reducing the number of stairs or escalators required to transfer” cannot be found in any ST document. That gives everyone legitimacy to ignore the concern as design plans get updated.
I get that Seattle has a number of outspoken but misguided citizens that can usurp useful suggestions. But even those misguided citizens often do have a kernel of truth within their comments.
It’s shameful to have open houses without design engineers interacting with the public. It’s shameful to say that there are four alternatives when each alternative varies so slightly that they all have similar outcomes in cost and ridership. It’s shameful that any pleas to plan for automation are summarily disregarded when most new rail line openings around the world are fully automated and have been for well over a decade.
This brainstorming is yet a token gesture. There is no one there that can risk suggesting anything significantly different. A much better approach is to develop a series of focus groups with different people at each one, and really listen to common threads and innovative solutions. But of course, ST wants to wallow in their badly-budgeted and non-performance-based planning process that they began in 2014.
Not until someone with legitimacy and guts can admit the fundamental truth about the obvious failures of the last decade of ST planning and is willing to say it’s unaffordable, unproductive and unsolvable without a financial action that is double what the region gave ST in ST3 can anything actually change.
The one good thing is the oblique reference to how the agency culture needs to shift from building to operating. That’s also badly needed. It amazes me how ST keeps rolling out long disruptions seemingly every month or two to fix things that most systems would solve overnight or maybe over a weekend.
Outside professional staff was used to develop the LRP, which identified corridors but not modes, and then again to develop the ST3 Plan, which selected corridors for funding and then specified modes. If the Board wanted to revisit which projects are in scope, then certainly experts* would be involved, but for now the Board is simply looking at the prioritization of projects and perhaps the scope within projects.
*More specifically, professional consultants. These are presumably transit experts, but if only Anglo/American consulting firms are involved their expertise is … perhaps counterproductive.
Outside professional staff was used to develop the LRP, which identified corridors but not modes, and then again to develop the ST3 Plan, which selected corridors for funding and then specified modes.
Only at a superficial level. For example the “spine” was a given (as both a corridor and mode). The ST3 plan ignored Ballard to UW despite performing better in their own planning than what they chose. Bus service from West Seattle was not seriously considered as a mode. The travel times from West Seattle downtown were worse that what exists now, let alone what could be achieved by building a bus tunnel (and other investments). When Kirkland hired and independent consultant to look at transit for the city they recommended BRT on the Cross-Kirkland-Corridor. The board rejected that idea — it was rail or nothing. Whatever role consultants have played in the planning for Sound Transit has been minimal or symbolic. They knew what they wanted to build and just worked backwards from there.
If Dow drops the phrase “surplus extraction” I might be excited, maybe just something about saying “no” a constituency, really just any constituency, would be a win, because if your goal is to get to yes for everyone, you will by definition extract 100% of the surplus (aka positive externalities) or more likely >100%, given the Plan assumes both debt and lot of Other People’s Money.
I could also work with “sacrifices” or “trade-offs”
I agree about the wording. So silly.
But besides all that I think it is actually a good approach. It appears as though they realize the big mess they are in. It also sounds like they are willing to consider just about anything. What isn’t clear is whether that includes rethinking the large projects in ST3. There is this assumption by the board that ST3 had the best possible set of projects and yet there is no evidence to support that. Even if you agree that West Seattle should have rail long before Ballard (or First Hill or a line from Ballard to the UW…) we should at least rethink the need for a downtown tunnel. For the same reason we should consider running Ballard Link to Westlake with automated trains (with tracks pointed to a future expansion to First Hill).
That would be a good way to “look at this program holistically” as Dow put it. Whether they actually do any of that seems unlikely. My guess is they will continue to (as he put it) “delay projects and diminish scope”.
All this time I’ve been imagining that there were expert staff at Sound Transit who understood what could reduce costs. It’s mostly: run in the street to avoid tunnelling, excavation, or property taking; replace buses with trains; and automate the trains. On the revenue side: start charging market rate for parking. Also, and this is not under the control of Sound Transit, but they should ask for it: tolls on I-5, I-90, and I-405. Surely there is someone at Sound Transit who can tell the CEO these things.
Regardless of intentions, I’m not sure it’s even possible to have a meaningful brainstorming session in such a formal environment like an ST board meeting. If the board members really wanted to brainstorm, they would meet in groups of 2 or 3 over a beer. No formal meeting rules, no cameras, no public scrutiny. Then, if they come up with something constructive, they can write it up and put it on the formal agenda for a real meeting, later.
Of course, there are probably open-meetings laws which would prohibit this sort of activity, but nonetheless, the way humans work, if you want out-of-the-box ideas, something like this is probably what you need.
Staff meets with the subareas leaders regularly for private briefings and those are not open to the public. In my experience on staff that is where the real discussions occur between board members and staff, as board members are more willing to be candid in private, both with criticism/feedback and with questions (easier to ask a potentially dumb question in private).
The Club World Cup, which will seriously test the transit system for a couple weeks, is less than two weeks away. It just got a little more ominous, as the Sounders’ third group stage opponent — Paris St Germain — just won the European Champions League (traditionally a trophy more prestigious than the Club World Cup). At least two deaths and hundreds of injuries were reporting in the ensuing partying in Paris.
I appreciate that ST has arranged Sounder service for the second through sixth matches at Lumen Field, and extra ST Express service.
.
It makes some sense to hold onto some of the downtown ST Express routes a while longer until after the (Men’s Nations’) World Cup. I think it would be better to just temporarily bring back ST Express 545 and 550 if 4-car trains on the 2 Line can’t handle sell-out crowds at Lumen Field.
I have no idea what the restructure will look like for the Federal Way Link extension, except that mid-day ST Express service between Tacoma, Federal Way, and downtown will still be around until the opening of the Tacoma Dome Link extension in the far distant future.
Why would the Cup be any different than a Seahawks game?
A single event at Lumen Field shouldn’t stress test the network, particularly on a weekend. The biggest stress would be 2 major sporting events, like a Husky game + Mariners game, occurring at the same time. Otherwise, the biggest Cup event shouldn’t be much different than a Thursday night Seahawks game.
I agree. As it turns out the Mariners will be out of town when the games will happen. Three of the games (on a Saturday, Monday and Tuesday) will be at noon. There is a 3:00 pm game on a Tuesday (which means that when the game gets out there will be congestion). There is also a game on Wednesday night at 6:00 pm and a game on Sunday night at 7:00 pm. This will have an impact on traffic and crowding for Link but not unprecedented.
Well, there’s more people bringing their families from out of town, so they’ll be coming and going all week.
Yeah, sure, but it is quite possible that most of the visitors will stay downtown. The tickets aren’t cheap. The flight isn’t cheap. Might as well stay downtown (even if that costs more than staying in the suburbs).
They’ll still be coming and going to the airport.
@AJ: Bravo, someone’s gotta say it. These soccer events aren’t the Olympics, they’re normal ticketed events at a stadium that hosts many sold-out events every year. Even the big World Cup that people actually care about… it’s just a few games at the stadium designed and built to host games.
A Thursday night Seahawks game is a bigger transportation problem than any of the soccer events because it attracts so much car traffic dead in the middle of rush hour. These games often seriously screw up bus routes that people from all over Seattle rely on to get home because the NFL demands that west-coast games be scheduled for east-coast TV viewers and nobody with even the tiniest amount of influence wants to acknowledge it’s a problem or suggest improvements.
They’ll still be coming and going to the airport.
Of course, but they will be a tiny portion of those coming and going to the airport. This isn’t like the Olympics where there are dozens of events happening all across the city or a World’s Fair that can over well over 100,000 visitors a day. There are six games involving six teams (and the Sounders). This is just the first round. Other than the Sounders the teams play in other venues as well. The main reason they would come here to watch the games is to visit Seattle.
For example consider Paris Saint-Germain. As Brent mentioned, they just won the Champions League. Playing the Sounders is like the Philadelphia Eagles playing a little league team after winning the Super Bowl. Also consider getting tickets in the first place. This really is a big deal for local fans. You get to the best team in the world. But it isn’t that big of a deal for people who live in France and are fans of the team. It is like the Eagles playing a game in Berlin. A big deal for the folks in London but not that many fans of the Eagles are going to fly to Germany just to see their team.
One reason to expect a surge in airport traffic is that Amtrak is not able to scale up for special events, even between Seattle and LA/Pasadena. Nor do I expect fans from Europe to try to get to Seattle in three days by stringing together local transit trips. Maybe some on Grehound. I’m guessing there will be a small armada of chartered buses convoying from Pasadena or LA to Seattle.
The travel planning gets much messier after that, based on teams’ seeds earned in the group stage, but it probably involves flying.
Sure, PSG will play the Sounders, after they play Atletico Madrid and Botafogo, the reigning Copa Libertadores (South American) champion. Advancement to the round of 16 will likely still be on the line when they come to Seattle for their group stage finale. It does not matter who they are playing. They are playing for an actual world championship.
The Google AI brought up the previous 2023 CL champion. Instead of Botafogo. FWIW.
Various neighborhood greenways groups are also plotting out safe biking routes to the stadium along with spray painting wayfinding, which hopefully will relieve some of the pressure on transit if there is crowding.
Will the stadium finally get serious about bike parking, commensurate with all the automobile parking?
The few Sounders games I’ve been to set up a few large bike corrals that might add up to a similar vehicle capacity to at least a few levels of the parking garages, plus Lime usually sets up a lot of bikes/scooters.
I thought the World Cup was next year. Are there two events?
I thought this too but apparently there’s “Club World Cup” this year and the real thing next year. I’m not a sportball person so I have no idea what the difference is but I would assume it’s a way to raise more ad revenue.
Soccer is weird. Teams that do well in their national leagues get chosen to play in international competitions and then if they do well there, they get the Club World Cup. The Sounders have qualified for that because… reasons. I don’t know the details.
The actual World Cup is more akin to the Olympics.
It’s the difference between the Mariners being in a series with Japanese and Korean and Dominican teams and having national baseball teams where the players are from across the majors.
The official reason the Sounders are in the Club World Cup is that they were among the last four teams to win the CONCACAF (North American) Champions League, having won it in 2022. FIFA expanded the Club World Cup to a 32-team tournament with a group stage this year. Previously, it was just contested among the six continental confederation champions and the winner of the host nation’s domestic league.
I find many things weird about Major League Baseball, especially the lack of a true world playoff, but that is mostly a topic for another blog. One salient point here is that Major League Soccer regular season matches (and all six CWC group stage matches) do not have extra sessions, matching the rest of the world.
@Brent White,
“ It makes some sense to hold onto some of the downtown ST Express routes a while longer until after the (Men’s Nations’) World Cup”
Ah, no. These are high cost, high subsidy routes that should be eliminated as soon as practical once they are made redundant by the new Link openings. Sure, redeploy the resources, but there is no need to keep running redundant routes with ridership that will be further depressed by the arrival of Link.
And it is far easier to add capacity with Link than it is to add capacity with buses. Small changes in frequency produce comparatively large increases in capacity, and the 2-Link is likely to be running with 3-car trains anyhow. Just adding an additional car (if needed) produces a 30% increase in capacity at near zero additional operational cost.
And I sincerely doubt that there will be a huge number of out of town visitors staying in downtown Redmond anyhow. There isn’t the hotel capacity, and most of these visitors will be coming from dense urban centers with robust rail systems. Redmond is not the kind of place they will look to first.
I’m guessing you have never been to the saint Germain district in Paris, or the adjacent Latin Quarter. Excellent transportation in the form of multiple underground Metro lines all in their own tunnels, fantastic and historic architecture, and absolutely excellent food.
Nobody from Paris saint Germain is going to come to Seattle and say, “Gee. Let’s stay in Redmond and ride this bus thing, enjoy the glass curtain wall architecture, and sample the high cuisine at Fatburger!” It just isn’t going to happen.
Most visitors will stay closer to downtown, use the train, and try to find something palatable to eat to sustain themselves until they can get home
The visitors from Paris will be coming this month, not next year, unless the (Men’s Nations) World Cup draw puts a France match at Lumen Field) so no 2 Line to what passes for hotels on the eastside, and no 1 Line to hotels in Federal Way, which I’m sure will be quite popular with the American visitors who wait to make their plans and are looking for bundled parking and shuttles to the stadium, or at least a station. They’ll be even more public-bus-averse than the Parisians.
Why would visitors from France come to Seattle to see their team play the Sounders? It is the round-robin part of the tournament — they don’t even need to win that game. They could win the two games in L. A. and advance to the next round. But of course they will win the game. This is like the Yankees playing a little league team. The tough part for the Parisian team is getting motivated. They have already won the big trophy. Now they have to play teams from around the world until they (probably) play the same European teams again to win this world trophy.
Of course some people will make the trip. There are bound to be people who have never seen Seattle and want to check it out. Some will go to L. A. and fly up here. But it is far more likely that they will just fly to New York to see the semifinal and finals based upon the (reasonable) assumption that they will make it that far. Or they just don’t care because they have already won the Champion’s League, a trophy that is arguably more prestigious. This really is no big deal for the Parisian team or their fans.
In contrast it is a big deal for soccer fans in the area. Folks get a chance to see some of the best teams in the world. This is world class soccer that is rarely seen in the area. It would be like seeing Nureyev or Pavarotti in their prime. In Seattle. You don’t get a chance like that very often which is why tickets to see Paris Saint-Germain range from $100 to $500. Not only do you get to see the best team in the world but you get to see your home team (the Sounders) play them. The vast majority of fans will be from here.
I think it is possible you will get a significant number of fans from Tokyo who want to see world class soccer and one of their teams (the Urawa Red Diamonds) play a couple games (including Milan). Tokyo to Seattle is a common tourist trip and it is easy to see soccer fans including the game with their visit. But not only there lots of tickets left, the tickets aren’t even that expensive. There clearly aren’t 50,000 people from Japan trying to see their team, otherwise the game would be sold out. At the same time a lot of local fans aren’t that interested in seeing the Urawa play Madrid. I’m not saying it won’t sell out. Fans looking for a bargain in terms of world class soccer will eventually buy those tickets. But it will be local.
They’ll be even more public-bus-averse than the Parisians.
What? Paris has a very good and very popular bus system with 3.5 million riders a day (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RATP_bus_network). Some of the buses have been replaced by trams because the buses are too popular. They need the additional capacity of trams.
The visitors from Paris will be coming this month so no 2 Line to what passes for hotels on the eastside, and no 1 Line to hotels in Federal Way
So what? Why would someone come all the way from Paris to Seattle to visit the suburbs? That makes no sense. They will stay downtown, walk to the game, walk to the market, walk to the waterfront and basically just walk everywhere. Maybe they take the train to the airport and that’s about it. I guess they might check out (or even stay) at the UW or Capitol Hill but Link can handle those trips just fine. The inability to take a train to Federal Way or the East Side is not an issue.
“ And I sincerely doubt that there will be a huge number of out of town visitors staying in downtown Redmond…”
Yes I agree. There just aren’t that many Eastside hotel rooms walkable to a 2 Line station, especially in comparison to the number that are walkable to a 1 Line station.
A web search says that there are 43K hotel rooms in King County. There appears to be about 5.5K in all of Bellevue and under 2K more in all of Redmond — and that includes hotels that aren’t within walking distance of Link. Meanwhile, Downtown Seattle alone has an estimated 17K.
The sources that I find online are tentative. However, I think the general hotel market on the Eastside is obviously relatively small.
“I sincerely doubt that there will be a huge number of out of town visitors staying in downtown Redmond anyhow”
As if Bellevue doesn’t exist. Visitors have heard through the grapevine that the Eastside is the affluent, clean area with high-end shopping. They may even have heard that Seattle has a lot of violent homeless drug addicts on the street. So where would the most timid affluent suburbanish people people stay? In the Eastside of course. Especially if they already know somebody there they can stay with or at least is in the same city. They’d more likely stay in Bellevue than Redmond because it’s closer, a bigger city, and has that high-end shopping.
They may even have heard that Seattle has a lot of violent homeless drug addicts on the street.
The people who believe such things aren’t the type that are going to travel to watch a soccer game.
I have read the conflations of homelessness, violence, and drug addiction. I still get the right-wing political groups’ rants in my inbox.
But I still travel to watch futbol matches sometimes, or at least I did in the Before Times. I liked to stay at an old hotel a block away from a major addict hang-out zone in Vancouver. So what? It happened to be walking distance from Pacific Central Station and had a direct bus to downtown and BC Place, and was very close to an Asian restaurant area.
Yeah it was just mere MLS matches, and the cheap post-match thrill of getting to sing (if you can call it that) “Our House (clap-clap-clap) in the middle of BC!” There were, thankfully, no STB commenters around to nitpick the geography.
I think more likely reasons for attendees to stay away from downtown would be downtown hotels charging astronomical rates during the event, or having a family member they can stay with.
When I visited the Vancouver Olympics in 2010, I stayed in Surrey, not because anything was happening in Surrey, but because I could find a hotel room there for only $300/night, rather than $500+/night, and the hassle of having to commute in by car and Skytrain everyday was worth it for the money saved.
I think more likely reasons for attendees to stay away from downtown would be downtown hotels charging astronomical rates during the event
I agree. But this just isn’t that big of an event for the reasons mentioned. It is the first round of a tournament that just doesn’t mean that much for the elite teams. Anyone researching a trip here will be focused on visiting Seattle for Seattle itself — not for the game. The game is just the cherry on top of the ice-cream sundae if you will. It is merely an excuse for someone who loves to travel and has heard of Seattle. Chances are they are more excited to see the new waterfront than the are the chance to see any of these games. If they find the hotels (or the airfares or the tickets) to be too expensive they will just skip it.
It is different for the finals. I could easily see fans booking tickets hoping that they win this tournament after losing the Champions League. Or even PSG fans hoping to win both. But this is just the first round. If they travel they do so to see Seattle and it is highly unlikely they won’t stay in Federal Way.
Which again, makes this a local event. If the Sounders manage to beat PSG it is quite something. Maybe the team from Paris just wasn’t trying but it is still freakin’ awesome for anyone who believes in the Sounders. But PSG would just shrug and get ready for the next round. This is why the tickets to that game are so much more expensive than the other games. People — from around here — want to see the winner of the Champions league play our local team. This really isn’t much different than a Seahawk game.
Inter Milan, the runner-up in the UEFA Champions League, will also be playing here, twice.
One advantage for the group stage hosts is that those matches are set months in advance (except for the unusual maneuver of LAFC as a last-minute substitution) so flights and hotels are easier to book.
I’m a big soccer fan who’s absolutely ignoring the Club World Cup. It’s just a lazy cash grab by FIFA. The global off-season is just six weeks, and this tournament reduces that to four for the participating European/Latin American teams. European players and coaches, a few of whom earn upwards of $350,000 *a week*, aren’t keen on slicing their down time — and risking injury the year before the (national team) World Cup — by a third for a new tournament that will only get their team a guaranteed $13-39 million, with the lion’s share going to the club and not player/coach bonuses. ( https://www.sportingnews.com/us/soccer/news/club-world-cup-prize-money-2025-1-billion-how-much-teams-get/201e38e013c18f1d20171dfb ) Don’t be surprised if a lot of global superstars blow the tournament off and hang out on the beach with their families.
The Sounders even wore protest shirts in warmups before their game Monday about the low amount — and an unspecified amount at that — they’re being paid to participate, in the middle of an already crowded season. The North American clubs are guaranteed just $9 million, with only $1 million of that going to the 22-30 players on the roster as far as anybody knows (there’s not been much transparency). As MLS salaries are very small compared to pro athletes — the MLS rookie minimum is $72,000, compared to $550,000 for the NHL; and 20 years ago, the MLS minimum was a paltry $16,000! — a higher bonus could be a life-changing amount for players who earn less than many of their fans. ( https://prosoccerwire.usatoday.com/story/sports/mls/2025/06/02/seattle-sounders-demand-more-fifa-club-world-cup-prize-money/83984580007/ )
I was at the game Sunday and heard a post-game chant “Pay the Players” Clap. Clap. Clap-clap-clap.
There has been painfully little advertising, as none of the teams are incentivized to help sell match tickets.
Are there any FIFA-sponsored events that are not cash grabs?
I was saddened to hear the Sounders organization is considering building a “soccer-specific” stadium out near Auburn. I’m pretty sure season ticket sales and attendance would plummet, with public transit no longer an option for most.
I was saddened to hear the Sounders organization is considering building a “soccer-specific” stadium out near Auburn.
That would be terrible. I’ve only attended a couple of the MLS Sounders games (I saw a lot of the NASL Sounders back when they played in the Kingdome). It is clear that the whole festival aspect of it is a big part of the event. Soccer fans basically take over downtown with the cheering and drumming and all that. It is fun when a rival (Vancouver or Portland) visits as well. I can’t imagine things in Auburn being anywhere near as much fun.
Adam has a followup video on the Coast Starlight from Seattle to Los Angeles, “Amtrak’s most beautiful train”, 36 hours with a sleeper that must be a Roomette.
(Comparison: Greyhound 24 hours, plane 2 hours.)
My favorite Amtrak route is the Empire Builder.
10-15 years ago, intercity travel by fixed-route bus was a popular topic in many transit discussion forums where I was (in China).
I planned a trip like that the summer of 2013 to travel 300 miles and cross 7 major Chinese cities in 3 days, only to fail the end of every day and ended up cheating by catching late night train to my destination of the day.
Back then it was a bit more challenging as the real-time transit information was not available. The transit agencies back home didn’t post schedule as most services were supposed to be “frequent”. Some smaller agencies didn’t publicize their service very well. The trip was planned based on anecdotal information shared online by transit fans who had experience with the trip.
Google “Pierce Transit fare increase”, and see why Google was a little too quick in furloughing its human fact-checkers.
First light rail train on a floating bridge (Sound Transit)
https://youtu.be/FGtpVGsPQrQ
Cool. They reference this as the first “light rail” over a floating bridge. Isn’t this the only train over a floating bridge?
No there have been several floating rail bridges previously. However, none have been electric, and none with the lifespan planned for this one.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pile%E2%80%93Pontoon_Railroad_Bridge
Light rail is a fairly arbitrary designation. Being the first electric rapid transit (tram/metro/subway) over a floating bridge seems a lot more impressive.
Have any additional trainsets gone across the bridge since May 22nd? Is it normal to “start testing” with just a single tow across and back without any follow up in the next 2 weeks?
I’m really starting to worry this was a PR stunt by Dow
Dylan, do you also believe that all the previous Sound Transit Link clearance tests were PR stunts?
@Dylan,
I am pretty sure there was only the one. And I don’t believe it was a real test for score. And absolutely nothing has been happening on the bridge the last few days. Nothing.
And please note, there are multiple dead tow tests that need to be performed simulating different operating conditions, weights, pantograph positions, etc. it seems sort of odd that they would start “testing” and then do absolutely nothing for the next few weeks. Not even work on the tracks.
So I’m more and more in the camp of performative PR on the part of Balducci/Dow. I don’t think it was a coincidence that the dragging of an LRV across the bridge occurred the day after that highly negative Seattle Times peice.
Lazarus, if you believe this latest test is a PR stunt, where’s your proof? Do you realize that other dead car pull clearance tests weren’t followed up in the following few weeks with live wire test? There is nothing different about this test. It’s normal for there to be no additional tests in the following weeks. Btw, ST has said that live wire testing will happen by July.
@Sam – No, I didn’t say that. But I was under the impression that several dead tow tests are necessary on a given length of track, based on different conditions, like Lazarus said.
My question was: is this sequence of events normal? What did we see during Lynnwood, or Northgate, or East Link, or Redmond testing? I didn’t keep close track! But I seem to recall it continued apace after the first test, so I’m wondering if there’s someone who did.
Given the new leadership and the conveniently timed test to answer to media criticism, I have a gut feeling that this was a wasteful and misleading PR stunt and I’m trying to piece together evidence to prove or disprove that.
Dylan, think about what you are saying … Dow Constantine contacts Kiewit-Hoffman and tells them he wants them to preform a dead car tow across the bridge asap. They tell Dow that they aren’t ready to conduct that type of test yet. Dow demands they do it, even if no testing is performed, they must run a train across the bridge as a PR stunt. K-H acquiesces and runs a train across the bridge on May 21st, well before they were ready to conduct the actual dead car pull test.
Do you know how nutty that theory sounds?
@Dylan,
“ But I was under the impression that several dead tow tests are necessary on a given length of track, based on different conditions, ”
That is correct. You can’t just drag an LRV across a given length of track and call it good. You need to simulate lightweight and heavy weight, and I’m sure asymmetrical weight. And you need to do it both with pantograph locked down and with pantograph deployed. And at the correct upload.
And the track and adjacent equipment has to be in its final, operational configuration. And that is my concern.
I went down there the next day and they were back to installing stuff. It’s hard to demonstrate that the LRV will clear all trackside components when not all trackside components are actually installed. To me that indicates a PR stunt.
But hey. I’m sure they will need to repeat the condition, but apparently nothing bad happened. At least that we know of……
@Sam,
“Dow demands they do it, even if no testing is performed, they must…….. as a PR stunt”
Stuff like that happens all the time. It’s actually not that unusual. And the PR stunt often works to the benefit of both parties.
ST participated in rushing the Point Defiance Bypass into service. That did not end well.
Just noting that there are two tracks. Shouldn’t there have been two dead tow tests, one for each track?
@Al S,
Yes. All the various dead tow tests need to be repeated for each track. And they also need to be repeated for all the crossovers. And for pantograph up and down.
And for light weight and heavy weight (remember the Apple Cup?).
I would have expected that if it was a real test we would have seen more dead tow testing by now. But it has been absolute crickets. Nothing.
I keep hearing July for start of testing, but I’m not really sure what sort of testing they mean. Let’s hope they make more progress than that.
Lazarus, you claimed that in this latest dead car pull across the lake, they only used one track. That they used one of the tracks going west, then used the same track coming back east. And you believe that is one clue that the test was a PR stunt. If it was a real test, they would have used both tracks. They used both tracks in the test! They used the north-side track going west, and used the south-side track going east. Here’s the proof …
https://youtu.be/pGbxxPO7FRU
@Sam,
That is actually meaningless per whether or not it was a real test.
The main reason for skepticism is that the track wasn’t in its final configuration yet.
And again, there are multiple dead tow tests required. If testing has really started, then why the multi week pause? It’s nonsensical.
@Sam,
Oh, and I never said they only used one track. I only said they had to complete the tests on both tracks. All the tests.
Lazarus, here’s what you said on June 2nd …
“And it looks like the previous Full ELE dead tow “test” was just for show and not a real test after all. Turns out it was on the westbound track, and that track didn’t have all the trackside goodies installed yet. It’s sort of hard to demonstrate adequate clearance when the things you are supposed to show clearance from don’t exist yet.”
Lazarus, you were clearly saying one of the reason you believe the test was just for show is because it only happened on only one track.
@Sam,
That was before ST released that video. But it still doesn’t mean the test was a real test.
Do you really trust Dow that much?
I’m about done with this topic. We’ll find out soon enough if it was a fake test or PR stunt or not. If in the coming days and weeks, the next train on the bridge is a live wire test, then we’ll know that the May 21st dead car tow test was 100% legit. Because if it was just a PR stunt, they’ll have to do another dead car tow, but for real.
(I also don’t believe multiple dead car tow tests are performed on the same segment or extension. I believe it’s usually one and done. One dead car tow test, followed by multiple live wire tests).
@Sam – I don’t appreciate my words being called “nutty.” I think heavy skepticism of ST is warranted, especially with Dow as the new CEO. I want world-class transit for Seattle and the Puget Sound region as much as anyone else here, but I basically don’t trust that ST is working well towards that goal. In any case, we shall see.
I think there’s a lot of speculation going on without much actual knowledge of the testing methods being used to check this section of the 2 Line. We don’t know what the dead tow test was actually aiming to achieve. It appears that it wasn’t a clearance check, because those usually have lots of temporary flags and panels to make sure nothing is intruding into the operational envelope.
It had been reported that this test was delayed multiple times, but the phrasing was always “test” – singular. My guess is that this was primarily a test of the novel track systems (especially around the transitions) and the adapted sections of I-90 roadway-turned-railway to check for unexpected structural issues.
Speculation that this might have been solely a PR stunt seems unfounded. Even if it was, it’s still an accomplishment to tow the train across the bridge and back (on both tracks!) successfully enough to post a PR video about it. It will be interesting to see if the test results in additional delays for fixes, though.
From Sound Transit’s recent bridge test video:
“On May 21, Sound Transit reached an exciting milestone on the East Link Extension project: the first light rail vehicle traversing the Homer M. Hadley Memorial Bridge between Mercer Island and Seattle. During this initial test, an unpowered Link train was pushed and then towed across the I-90 floating bridge, testing clearance and bridge flexion.
Over the next few months, we’ll begin testing trains on their own power. As testing continues this summer, we’ll have more clarity about when the 2 Line cross-lake connection will be ready to welcome passengers aboard — currently trending toward early 2026.”
And, Dylan, sorry for using that word. Btw, I’m calling the theory that, not you.
I’m not quite sure why people here are questioning the tow test.
Assuming the original december or january/february opening date of the full east link they would start testing around 6 months beforehand. Aka around may or june and then after the clearance test start actual trials of the train powered. the timeline all matches up.
@Al S,
I was walking on Lake Washington Blvd today near I-90 and saw 25 or so people huddled together, all wearing ST PPE and wearing what looked like office attire. Definitely not your normal sight.
They all followed this one guy and then walked out on the floating bridge to about mid-span. They seemed to be studying system boxes, which is probably a good sign.
Unfortunately there were also some other guys working on the track. That would be a good thing given how quiet it has been of late, but they were also unbolting some of the rails and moving them over with a nudge bar. Not a good sign!
I then walked to IDS station and saw Dow mugging for the cameras in front of ST headquarters for some sort of Pride event. Someone needs to let that guy know that bright white tennis shoes don’t go with dark blue pants.
And then I boarded Link at IDS directly into a fight between a bunch of high school girls. One of them actually hit a security guard – multiple times.
It’s been an eventful day, unfortunately. So I think I’ll just go work in the garden for a while.
L, thank you for doing that. You are one of the few commenters who will actually go out and investigate things and write about it.
I have been very critical of ST in the past. But why on earth would ST perform a “PR stunt”? What is gained by it? The vast majority of the public doesn’t care about the testing. They just want to see the project complete. If anything raising expectations only to lower them in a month would be worse than pretending like this is going to take a long time and then announcing it won’t.
@Sam,
“ thank you for doing that”
No problem.
I’ve been around infrastructure/engineering projects most of my life, since I was a kid really. So I like to get out and see what is happening. And I also don’t like it when the politicians and their PR machines get in the way of project delivery. Just get the project done, and done right.
This is a great city, and I love it. But, up until Central Link opened in 2009, it was also a city without a mass transit system. I always used to have to apologize to my out of town friends for Seattle’s lack of mass transit, but I don’t have to do that anymore. Link is here. Finally.
But Link won’t be a truly great system until we get a second line. And we need that second line to alleviate crowding between UWS and WLS. Link has simply become too successful for its current configuration. We need that second line.
I just hope I see it before I die.
Any more thoughts on interstate travel by local transit? Or interstate travel by surface transit in general?
I once did DC to Boston on mostly local transit once, was visiting friends and family basically every stop along the way. DC to Baltimore on MARC, to Philadelphia on Amtrak, to NJ on SEPTA and NJ Transit, to NYC on NJ Transit, to Stony Brook on LIRR to Providence on Bridgeport ferry, Metro-North, and Amtrak, to Boston on MBTA. My understanding is that even in the densely populated east coast, if you want to avoid Amtrak/FlixBus on the two segments that I took it, you have to deal with stuff like buses that run something like twice a day. I’m honestly surprised that this person was able to do SF-Seattle in just 3 days. It feels like our rural transit is much better funded than comparable situations on the East coast (though of course the urban areas there have better local transit).
I think it’s amazing that enough rural transit exists to be able to do such a trip at all. In Texas, where I grew up, the default expectation is that only big cities have transit.
To provide an example, consider Galveston, Texas, about the population of Olympia and slightly closer to Houston than Olympia is to Seattle. According to Wikipedia, Galveston has a skeletal transit center with just two local routes (Link to the agency’s webpage is broken, so not sure if even that still exists), and no connections to Houston other than Uber and Lyft.
The difference in levels of transit outside of big metropolises in here vs. there is night and day. A trip from Houston to Dallas, Austin, or San Antonio, on municipal transit buses, I’m pretty sure is not even possible.
I once did Amtrak by train from Charleston to Buffalo, with just a fellow 15 year old friend. I was moving, and back then (early 80s) Amtrak had some sort of deal which made it the cheapest option to move heavy boxes and such. I’m not sure if that meant they had mixed passenger/ freight sets, or what.
We had to switch from Grand Central to Penn Station in NYC. The scammers were out in force. I think we paid some dude 5 dollars to point us at a taxi. Too funny.