On August 24, 2026, Kent’s long-awaited Quiet Zone took effect along the BNSF Railway mainline through downtown. This designation, granted by the Federal Railroad Administration in June, no longer requires trains to sound their horn when approaching an at-grade crossing. Over the past 14 years, the City of Kent has worked to meet the necessary requirements to achieve a Quiet Zone. Recent infrastructure upgrades include building raised concrete medians, adding additional signs, and refreshing pavement markings. In a non-Quiet Zone area, all trains are required to sound their horn 15-20 seconds before each street crossing.
The BNSF mainline tracks are used by 38 passenger trains and many more freight trains every day. The frequent at-grade crossings in downtown Kent resulted in nearby residents hearing hundreds of train horns day and night. The Quiet Zone stretches between S 212th St and S 259th St. The following crossings are included:
- S 212th Street
- James Street
- Smith Street
- Meeker Street
- Gowe Street
- Titus Street
- Willis Street (State Route 516)
- S 259th Street
As safety is still a top priority, train engineers are still allowed to sound the horn in emergency situations or as they deem necessary. While the Quiet Zone is officially in effect, it may take some time for nearby residents to hear a difference. One week after the change was implemented, the Kent Reporter noted that many trains were still using their horn at each crossing. I was in Kent earlier this week and each of the five trains (four Sounder, one Amtrak Cascades) I saw used their horn at each crossing.
This is an open thread.
The draft EIS is out for Everett Link. One interesting segment was the ridership forecast (page 51 of the full EIS). There’s high ridership forecasted for Ash Way, Mariner, and Everett, with low to middling ridership for all the other stations.
I didn’t realize that the plan was to have Phase 1 go all the way to Paine Field. I think it would be better to get to Mariner ASAP and figure out the extension later. Also, there should almost certainly be an infill station near the Paine Field terminal if the station isn’t located there
https://www.soundtransit.org/get-to-know-us/news-events/news-releases/sound-transit-announces-publication-everett-link-extension
I was wondering when the public could see the technical documentation. Thanks for the heads up!
In the Transportation appendix, the ugly truth about travel time is discussed. The project save 3 minutes in 2046 headed outbound during PM congestion and take 5 minutes more inbound during PM congestion. Of course, most of the day that congestion won’t be there — and so ST would be spending $12B to make transit travel slower between Lynnwood and Everett Downtown most times of the day.
And the intermediate travel time savings only apply to what’s next to stations. Yet the employment estimates are so low at these stations that the forecasted boardings in 2046 are lower than every station currently open except for the two lowest at Wilburton and East Main.
This is what happens when a bunch of car drivers draw lines on a map. They pitch noble themes like complete the Spine (even though the Spine extends to Arlington now) and reach an employment district in SW Everett (even though almost all the jobs are too far to walk too) and don’t give a damn about making the segment productive and fast.
https://www.soundtransit.org/sites/default/files/documents/14-EVLE-DEIS-AppendixG.1.pdf
Somers probably thinks Boeing workers will be able to drive from Paine Field Station to their job.
How? By buying a second car and parking it at the station overnight?
Realistically, the last mile solution is probably going to be some kind of shuttle bus that goes door to door, stopping at every building, and that last mile shuttle, alone, is going to take nearly as long as driving all the way from home (with no stops).
Boeing already runs a handful of shuttle bus routes throughout the Everett site and its surroundings (including on public roads, as not all parking or work buildings are behind the factory fenceline). It’s pretty reasonable to expect they will include the light rail stop.
@ dc:
While I believe that commute and other private shuttles are useful conceptually, there haven’t been any new shuttles introduced that I can find as a result of the extensive Link system expansion since 2021. Someone had even pointed out that designated private shuttle stops for specific services are not allowed in transit centers.
If private shuttles are an attractive option, ST should be trying to get them into many of the recently opened Link stations today to demonstrate their effectiveness.
To ban private shuttles today but expect them to then add ridership to Link in the future is unfortunately illogical.
as long as private shuttles don’t occupy curb space otherwise delegated to public buses, i’m totally fine with it. arguing against building a public drop-off/pick-up curb at an industrial job-site station and encouraging private businesses to use it is definitely not the hill i’m going to die on. if decision to route the line to the boeing factory has already been made, then its hardly ridiculous to suggest working with boeing itself on future planning.
appreciate that there’s not been much in the way of establishment of private shuttles thus far, but 1) the boeing site already has a private shuttle system and 2) the size of the site is entirely exceptional compared to other job centers in its bias for an enormous single employer, except maybe for microsoft at redmond tech station. it’s not a fair comparison
Redmond Tech station has private shuttle spaces because Microsoft paid for that and the bridge. ST should certainly make sure Paine Field station has a similar arrangement, since the primary purpose of the station is for shuttles to jobsites.
“I didn’t realize that the plan was to have Phase 1 go all the way to Paine Field.”
It was a recent change this year I think. Previously ST had said it might be split into a Mariner phase if the cost of going to Everett all at once was too high. Going to Paine Field is apparently for OMF reasons: the base alternatives are further than Mariner.
Mike makes a good point. The proposed OMF sites are all way beyond Mariner.
This is correcting the disconnect when proposing ELE in 2016. None of those car-driving elected officials with crayons creating ST3 lines thought seriously about the OMF locations.
“Mike makes a good point. The proposed OMF sites are all way beyond Mariner.”
Sound Transit once proposed an OMF site at 164th because they mused having Everett Link skip Paine Field.
Is Link actually going to serve the Paine Field Terminal?
None of the options are spectacularly close unfortunately. The best option would still put you on the opposite side of airport way.
Of course, if Paine Field were to become a second regional airport, the terminal would likely have to be rebuilt so does it really matter too much?
It does matter. SeaTac Airport is easily the busiest Link station not on the 2 Line. The airport is running out of room to grow.
Moving the Paine Field terminal a mile or two is not something easily done.
Scoliating the path of Link merely to serve an anti-transit center in the middle of nowhere is utter folly.
The Paine Field Master Plan shows no light rail corridor into the airport. It suggests a remote garage and rental car area. Something like a current LAX setup would seem to be most likely investment in localized circulation (terminal-rail-rental car- parking shuttle).
https://www.painefield.com/153/Airport-Master-Plan
That said, the most ambitious possibility of additional runways and terminal expansions would seem to attract no more than 10-15 percent of SeaTac total departing flyers today. At about 10K boardings there today, that would mean 1000-1500 boardings at a Paine Field Link station. And that assumes similar disincentives to SeaTac like very high daily parking rates and significant terminal area congestion — two key factors on why a flyer would want to use Paine Field over SeaTac.
That would put it below most of today’s Link stations. Sure it would be a nice option, but there are much more strategic investments that could attract lots more riders.
I don’t think Sound Transit plans to serve Paine Field, but I think they should. Right now it’s still a small airport, but SeaTac is projected to reach passenger capacity in the next 5-10 years, after which the only real option for commercial flights is Paine Field.
By the time Link to Paine Field could feasibly open (around 2040) Paine Field is projected serve about 10% of the number of passengers of SeaTac. That’s not a crazy number of passengers but I think it would be quite valuable in the longer term; if passenger volumes grow as anticipated it’ll serve around 20-40% of SeaTac by the 2050s.
Of course this is all predicated on Paine Field growing into a mid- or large-sized airport, but I think the case for that is fairly strong.
https://painefield.com/250/Approved-Master-Plan
Part of phase 1 getting that far is because the OMF is going to be that far. That guideway has to get built anyway to access the yard so may as well do the little more to get to SWEIC.
just in case anyone didnt pick this up, the conceptual bus connections proposed all rely on consolidating everett and community transit together according to appendix g.1, section 4.2.1:
“For the purposes of assessing future transit integration with the EVLE Project, Sound Transit has worked with Community Transit and Everett Transit to develop a future transit network that combined both operator’s service networks. This network would need to be refined closer to project opening to develop more detailed operations plans for transit integration. Table 4-6 shows how transit service would operate with the No Build and Build Alternatives in 2046. Transit service operating in 2037 would be the same as that described in Table 4-6, with exceptions noted where connections to EVLE are not provided due to stations beyond the initial phase not being in operation at that stage.”
at first glance this may imply that theyre just collated together, the routes in table 4-6 actually takes many, many elements from the MTT report. they should reword this.
all routes become 30 or better by 2037, with multiple routes being 20 mins or better. and lots of aggregated 15 minute or better service. under some alternatives, areas like casino road will get hyper-frequent service to rail. and the underserved 5th->4th corridor gets service (and frequent at that), finally.
its proving increasingly imperative that transit consolidation Must happen or everett will be shooting itself in the foot
The freight trains seem to me to be a larger concern than Sounder. They barrel through downtown Kent, while Sounder is slowing to a stop, and then re-starting.
Amtrak ought to do the same, and relinquish the Tukwila stop (and/or stop in Auburn, plus a temp stop in Puyallup during the state fair). But I digress.
Are flashing lights and crossing gates without sound allowed, or even required? Or do the neighbors oppose that, too? Is Kent simply taking a position that protecting lives is BNSF’s, Amtrak’s, and ST’s problem to sort out?
Is Lakewood still suing to get crossing gates, with chimes.
Meta: I wish this were not an open thread, given the immense safety issues to talk about here.
I believe that the quiet zone generally refers to train horns. When I lived in Portland, the crossing at 11th/12th/Milwaukie was in a quiet zone but there were definitely crossing arms with flashing lights and bells, the trains just didn’t blow their horns. I would say that gates and lights are requirements for quiet zones. The FRA has a page on quiet zones here: https://railroads.dot.gov/railroad-safety/divisions/crossing-safety-and-trespass-prevention/train-horn-rulequiet-zones, and you can read the relevant statutes on how risk is calculated here: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49/subtitle-B/chapter-II/part-222/appendix-Appendix%20C%20to%20Part%20222
I do not believe that Lakewood is within an established quiet zone (https://railroads.dot.gov/elibrary/quiet-zone-locations-city-and-state-1)
Brent,
Serious question as I see this brought up a lot. What safety issues now exist with a quiet zone that didn’t before? All the previous train incidents, whether pedestrian or vehicle, occurred with the trains sounding their horns and crossing bells ringing (which will still be happening). So the safety that everyone purports to exist with these warnings didn’t stop those incidents. Now, if there is a dramatic increase with the quiet zones, that is a good conversation to have. But simply thinking that removing these audible warnings will cause a dramatic safety decrease just feels like fear-mongering.
Even the FRA concluded that there was no statistically significant increase in trespass fatalities (which, I assume, is the basis for the concern for safety) where quiet zones were implemented.
https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/2025-05/Trespass%20Risk%20in%20Quiet%20Zones.pdf
I would love to hear what the City of Kent is doing to reduce the existing fatality rate from train-person collisions, and for that matter, if Kent has a Vision Zero plan for reducing traffic fatalities in general.
Brent, you said you wished this post wasn’t an open thread, because you wanted to focus the conversation on safety, but when M J S asked you a safety-related question, you didn’t answer it.
Basically, the general public has become detached enough from how intertwined railroads are to their everyday life, save for their interactions at road crossings, that they basically ignore all the warnings anyway.
One hopes the City of Kent is planning some sort of grade separated crossing[s], which will allow the railroad to close a few crossings.
Old Town crossing in Tacoma has a faux train horn on the gate that is more muted compared to the actual freight horns going through there. The local residents appreciate being able to sleep. But the faux horn broke this summer and they reverted to the freight horns. Many complaints.
If it’s like Edmonds, the wayside horns are the responsibility of the city.
They’re tied into the crossing gates, which are the responsibility of the railroad.
What’s telling the engineers that the wayside horns are working is the flashing X’s on the poles at the crossing.
Residents should be asking the city why the wayside horns aren’t working properly.
I was more offering this as a compromise solution for those who are concerned about safety.
I wasn’t really whining or looking for a solution to Tacoma’s problems. I don’t live close enough to know, but they were aware and trying to fix it, but they estimated a month a couple months ago, so I assume it’s fixed.
What people need is a sound. If all the intersections have crossing bells, the horn seems redundant. Conversely, if the horn is turned off, there needs to be some other warning sound at the intersection. And they’ll need to make sure that signal works, since it’s not part of the train.
A little bit more info on the mysterious fish kill at the I-90 floating bridge.
I find it interesting that the diver who discovered the dead fish noted that he was exploring the ruins of the old bridge. I wonder if there is still toxic waste seeping from that wreckage. When it went down there was massive construction underway so lots of fuel and other chemicals went down with the ship.
There was some speculation that perhaps chlorine gas was being produced when the anodes were in the muck at the bottom of the lake. I wish someone would clarify if the purpose of the anode lines is to protect against stray current or simple corrosion from dissimilar metals. Evidently SR-520 is using a different system?
Needs to be an infill station at Airport Road and Highway 99. This would also tie in to two Community Transit Swift BRT lines, one of which already goes to downtown Everett, and the other to Paine Field. The location has many strip malls and surface parking lots that could be re-developed as TOD. In fact, I would have Phase 1 end there, just for making the connections to the BRT lines. Community Transit has put A LOT of time and effort towards building out Swift, and Airport Rd/Highway 99 makes more sense as a temporary terminus than Mariner. It could be the “transit oriented terminus” while Mariner is the “park and ride terminus.”
“Community Transit has put A LOT of time and effort towards building out Swift, and Airport Rd/Highway 99 makes more sense as a temporary terminus than Mariner.”
I would say Mariner is a better terminus because it’s shared with the 2 Line and you avoid overlap with the Swift lines.
I agree.
The increased entire project cost is going from $8B to $12B. (The staff almost certainly knew this while the Enterprise Initiative was being discussed but kept it from the public.) The project cannot reach Downtown Everett by 2041 because the funds are just not there.
To be clear, I’m agreeing with Brandon here.
I mention the project cost problem because there easily may not funds to take it further than 99/ Airport Rd. But with express buses from Downtown Everett to Mariner, and Swift Blue and Green already hitting lots more places frequently than the remaining two intermediate stations will, transit riders will get better transit service and the region will save billions that they don’t have anyway.
“I mention the project cost problem because there easily may not funds to take it further than 99/ Airport Rd.”
People living in Everett will burn over losing light rail to it’s downtown area. Similar to how even though the D Line already goes from Seattle Center to Ballard, the residents there had a cow when the board voted to indefinitely defer light rail to Ballard.
I get what you are saying but I still think the heart of Everett is worth serving. Routing it via Paine Field might not be the best option but we at least serve that major city, like if you truncated Tacoma Dome Link at Fife or Portland Ave and make riders take a bus to reach the final destination, which the board actually considered at one point.
“The staff almost certainly knew this while the Enterprise Initiative was being discussed but kept it from the public.”
Yeah because the board chair wants to open the “regional spine” before any other Link project. They don’t care about costs, they just care about serving Everett and Tacoma.
This will be good for local businesses in downtown Kent. Those train horns can be annoying, leading customers to go elsewhere, especially in cafes with outdoor seating.
What is needed, track-wise, to enable all-data service on the S Line?
all-day service
The best way to accommodate more passenger service on the BNSF line through the hearts of the downtowns is to up the parallel UP on the westside of the valley up to two-main-track with WSDOT owning the second track and providing non-profit access to both BNSF and UP on it. At the same time, any place that can accommodate a third track on the BNSF but doesn’t yet have one should get it.
https://transportationmatters.wordpress.com/2015/08/26/improving-rail-mobility-in-the-puget-sound/
Troy went through the work that needed to be done in more detail than I’m willing to read at the moment.